backtop

Print 21 comment(s) - last by Cullinaire.. on Jun 12 at 11:16 AM

A New Jersey man stands accused of demanding sexually explicit images from underage boys looking to join his Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 clan  (Source: Photobucket)

There's been an alarming rise in pedophiles using gaming networks to take advantage of children of late.  (Source: 4Chan)
"Have a seat over here... So what made you log on today?"

It's no secret that there's plenty of creeps out on the internet.  Recent stories about Facebook and Myspace predators have emphasized that fact.  Recently, a disturbing new trend has arose is pedophiles using video game networks to lure in kids.  Recent stories involved predators using the Xbox Live and Sony Playstation Network to solicit illicit sexual relations and images from minors.

Now another gaming-related case of pedophilia has reared its ugly head.  A 20-year old New Jersey male, Jonathan Prime faces four felony counts of "communication with a minor for immoral purposes."

Prime reportedly offered unusual terms to young men looking to join his Call of Duty: World at War clan -- send him pictures of their genitals if they want to join up.  That request landed Prime in court accused of his second sex crime.  Prime has already been found guilty of a previous sex crime in his home state of New Jersey; the new case is being tried in Seattle, home of one of his 13 and 14-year-old victims.

According to police some kids rejected Prime's advances.  Others, however, accepted his terms and sent him explicit images.  And one kid even agreed to call Prime and participate in phone sex with him.  Prime has already admitted to the engaging in sex crime, according to police.  The police state, "Confronted by investigators, Prime claimed he believed the boys to be 14 or 15."

Prime is currently released on $25,000 USD bail.  And before anyone mentions it, Call of Duty: World at War is a M-rated title, which means no one under 17 should be allowed to purchase it; regardless, that hardly excuses Prime's disgusting behavior.

The incident was the second high profile video-game relate sex crime news to break in just a week.  Last week 46-year-old Taiwanese man who impersonated Buddhist monks (he dressed like monks, but was not one) was arrested after raping 4 boys.  According to authorities in Thailand he lured boys into his house by offering to let him play his Wii.  The phony "monk" faces up to 28 years in Thai prison for his crimes.  He claims the sex was "consensual".

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
kids
By Beno on 6/7/2010 7:12:17 AM , Rating: 4
kids are getting retarded more and more every day xD




RE: kids
By adiposity on 6/7/2010 1:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
Well, what would it take for you to send a pic of your genitals? $1000? $10,000? Etc.

The kids just have a lower threshold, e.g., joining a clan they really want to join.


RE: kids
By Beno on 6/7/2010 4:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
i dont think I could be tricked at 15 to do something like this.


RE: kids
By The Raven on 6/8/2010 1:48:37 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, these kids probably don't give a damn. Moonings used to be a regular thing. But in the time of "Jackass" anything else is possible.

I mean, how many teenagers do you know that REALLY care if a guy works his man over a pic of their junk. Sure they might find it creepy but thinking of all the punk I run into online I can totally seeing some of them doing this. Kids like this don't care if they are encouraging a perve like this.


RE: kids
By FaceMaster on 6/11/2010 6:17:26 PM , Rating: 2
What if they're JUST over-age? Does that make it okay?

What if they're less developed and far less mature than some one a day earlier who happens to be under age?

What if you took pictures of yourself naked, (as a child) and then uploaded it years later, with your consent?

What if you're a porn star who wakes up in a child's body?

What if they're wearing clothes, but the pictures are taken while walking through an airport scanner?

What if the child is your brother/sister/child?

What if the child's dead?

It's a grey area. I stay safe and stick to the other end of the age spectrum, just to play safe.

(Warning: this post may contain humour. Take it seriously at your own risk)


Which one?
By evolveNow on 6/7/2010 5:22:40 PM , Rating: 2
The title says the game was COD:MW2 but the article body refers to COD:World at war, which one is it?




RE: Which one?
By jvillaro on 6/7/2010 8:43:06 PM , Rating: 5
Does it really matter? Are you trying to join the clan?


RE: Which one?
By neothe0ne on 6/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: Which one?
By Hiawa23 on 6/8/2010 2:48:53 PM , Rating: 4
I play the games on Xbox Live, alot of kids are playing these games, like Gears Of War, & others & honestly, it really doesn't matter what they are rated. Kids can get these games, most parents have no idea what their kids are doing & many of them buy these games for them not knowing the rating or the violence, language & gore in these games. I have a 12 year old daughter, & I closely monitor what she does with her MySpace page, online use, & her online play on her Wii. For this guy to be doing this at such a young age, really shows there are alot of sick people out there just waiting to prey on our children. You better pay attention to what your kids are doing, that's all I have to say. This guy is sick.


Huh...
By VenomSymbiote on 6/7/2010 1:28:38 PM , Rating: 5
For the record, I never thought I'd see the words "Source: 4Chan" EVER.




Irony
By Trisped on 6/7/2010 5:50:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Prime is currently released on $25,000 USD bail. And before anyone mentions it, Call of Duty: World at War is a M-rated title, which means no one under 17 should be allowed to purchase it; regardless, that hardly excuses Prime's disgusting behavior.

The site which is always quick to denounce any form of censorship, including game ratings, is using them to say these kids shouldn't have been playing it?
Ironic if you ask me.




RE: Irony
By The Raven on 6/8/2010 2:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
I think it was:
1) to point it out before anyone else does regardless of reasoning.
2) to hint that the kids' parents should be in on their activities online or off.


My Rant
By IamJedi on 6/7/2010 4:05:45 PM , Rating: 2
In truth, parents need to teach their kids what is right and what is wrong, especially when it comes to the Internet. I think we can all agree that it's quite literally impossible to be with your kid 24/7, but that does not mean our teachings cannot follow them around. As I said previously, it is important for a parent to teach their kid what is right and what is wrong, like in this instance with this pedophile. The threat is very real, and parents need to understand that, while the chance might be small, their child could still become subject to a sexual attack from an online predator.

Do I think the parents should be in trouble because their kid made a mistake in talking to an online predator? Legally, no, but emotionally, yes. As others have said here, a child is easily persuaded to do things that aren't right in order to fit into the group, but it befalls the parent's responsibility to make sure that their child understands the real, clear dangers out there that they may one day face alone.

As goes for Jason's rant about kids should not basically be able to have the ability to get a hold of an M-rated game, here is my take on that. While I understand that maturity is something that takes a long time, I am a firm believer that everyone matures at a different rate. At the age of 16, I was playing GTA and Halo 2, but these games did not make me into a mean, asshole kid, no. It is important to understand that the M-rated title is a guideline, not a mandate. It is ultimately up to the parent's discretion on rather their child can mentally handle playing an M-rated game or not. Though, like everyone else, I hate those 7 year old kids that get on!




Like Kyles mom....
By Freezebyte on 6/9/2010 11:49:17 AM , Rating: 2
What, what, whaaaaat???????!!!!




By Cullinaire on 6/12/2010 11:16:50 AM , Rating: 2
Beware Jonathan, for Optimus is coming for you.

And he will not forgive.




Is it enough to punish the perpetrator?
By corduroygt on 6/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: Is it enough to punish the perpetrator?
By MrBlastman on 6/7/2010 8:57:14 AM , Rating: 4
So basically what you're proposing is similar to:

If a kid is kidnapped, throw the parents in jail because the kid couldn't get away from their captor.

-or-

If a kid defecates in their teachers desk, throw the parents in jail because the kid should have known better.

-or-

If a bully steals a kids lunch money, sue the parents and take all their money.

-or-

If a young boy grew up and murdered millions of people, eventually killing himself, hunt down the parents graves and hold them accountable for their child's crimes...

-or-

If a young boy becomes a raging homosexual and in turn sodomizes several adult men (which is illegal in some southern states), his parents should be thrown in jail.

Look, I feel parents should be completely responsible for their child--and should hold it to themselves to do everything in their power to demonstrate a proper role model and system of discipline to allow their child to flourish in a positive, societally beneficial way.

However, it doesn't always work out. Some kids are just born "bad." They have a screw loose in their heads and it is beyond their parents control. IF it is shown that the parents tried their darndest to help their child while growing up, how can you hold them accountable?

Bad apples slip through. People aren't wired right and no matter how good their parents are, they still will mess up in life and do things illogical or illegal. You can't possibly throw all these criminals parents in jail--into our already overcrowded penal system burdening taxpayers further.

It sounds good, I just don't think it fits the crime every time. In some instances I think parental neglegence could be proved but I wouldn't be so quick to say it is so every time.


RE: Is it enough to punish the perpetrator?
By corduroygt on 6/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: Is it enough to punish the perpetrator?
By omnicronx on 6/7/2010 12:39:33 PM , Rating: 2
You are making baseless assumptions. Kids are stupid, plain and simple, so please stop pretending as though these were adults making 'informed' decisions.

Kids will do a lot to be a part of something they feel is important, you have no idea how their parents taught them, or if they were left unattended etc etc.

There is also a little thing called innocence, you can warm your children, you can teach them what is right. Unfortunately sometimes they will only learn by making a mistake and learning for themselves. (Whether the result is good or bad)

Now I am not saying the parents are not in the wrong here, but we don't have the facts to make such a statement at this time.


RE: Is it enough to punish the perpetrator?
By tmouse on 6/7/2010 1:23:00 PM , Rating: 3
There is no justification for the sick behavior of this predator, however by 14 if your too "innocent" to understand it's not smart to send anyone a picture of your reproductive organs you should not be allowed on the net, period. You should probably be enrolled in a "special" class. The parents should be held responsible for providing the software to these children also.
As for baseless assumptions, It a good guess they were left unattended unless you're really implying the parents were fine with their kids sending this stuff to him and I highly doubt many would tell their kids it's ok to trust everyone on the net and respond to this kind of a request. They bought their children an M rated game, that's not exactly responsible unless you're sure your child can handle ALL M rated themes, that includes some basic knowledge of how to handle requests from perverts.


By retrospooty on 6/8/2010 10:45:08 AM , Rating: 3
"There is no justification for the sick behavior of this predator, however by 14 if your too "innocent" to understand it's not smart to send anyone a picture of your reproductive organs you should not be allowed on the net, period. "

Exactly. Any normal 14 year old, or 10 year old for that matter would know to say know.

Clan sicko - Would you like to join my clan?
Child - Yes, What do I need to do?
Clan sicko - send me some nude pics.
Child - NO (followed by setting this person to ignore list)

Any kid, or adult for that matter that falls prey to something this blatently obvious is too stupid to be on the internet and likely has a long life of being taken advantage of because they arent bright.

Sad but true.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il













botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki