US teacher traveled to Thailand for sex tourism, feds say

[wandasloan]

I know a female Thai NGO in Chiang Mai who helps under age boys in the sex trade in Chiang Mai.

She claims there are 52 venues in Chiang Mai city, that she knows of, where men can go to have sex with under age boys.

Doesn't sound like she's helping them much, though, what with being so comfortable keeping this knowledge from the public and from the authorities. To me, that seems strange. Is she writing a book or something, that she doesn't want it generally known she has this exclusive and very, very troubling information of continuing mass rape?

A very nasty mind might even wonder if she's helping herself by guaranteeing a steady flow of boys in the sex trade she can help. Not me, but someone.

[MaeJoMTB]

I know a female Thai NGO in Chiang Mai who helps under age boys in the sex trade in Chiang Mai.

She claims there are 52 venues in Chiang Mai city, that she knows of, where men can go to have sex with under age boys.

Doesn't sound like she's helping them much, though, what with being so comfortable keeping this knowledge from the public and from the authorities. To me, that seems strange. Is she writing a book or something, that she doesn't want it generally known she has this exclusive and very, very troubling information of continuing mass rape?

A very nasty mind might even wonder if she's helping herself by guaranteeing a steady flow of boys in the sex trade she can help. Not me, but someone.

Quite frankly, I don't think the Thai authorities care.

They only take action when foreign press whip them up, or they can make money.

I'm guessing the venues are all paying the police to not bother them.

She did mention that the kids parents usually oppose them trying to rehabilitate the kids.

The parents want the money.

What she does provide,

A safe place for the boys to hang out or stay, training opportunities for them to find other options in their life.

Edited February 13, 2016 by MaeJoMTB

[CharlieH]

Several "Troll" remarks and responses to them removed.

8) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

[thaibeachlovers]

I know a female Thai NGO in Chiang Mai who helps under age boys in the sex trade in Chiang Mai.

She claims there are 52 venues in Chiang Mai city, that she knows of, where men can go to have sex with under age boys.

Doesn't sound like she's helping them much, though, what with being so comfortable keeping this knowledge from the public and from the authorities. To me, that seems strange. Is she writing a book or something, that she doesn't want it generally known she has this exclusive and very, very troubling information of continuing mass rape?

A very nasty mind might even wonder if she's helping herself by guaranteeing a steady flow of boys in the sex trade she can help. Not me, but someone.

Perhaps you overlook the Thai way? Going public in an attempt to embarrass the authorities does not generally work in LOS as it would in the west- more likely she would be "encouraged" by certain people to vanish herself ( or even possibly worse ) from the scene.

Keeping her head down allows her to help kids without endangering herself.

[Bluespunk]

What is the difference in this guy "traveling" for illegal sex to Thailand and Las Vegas? or certain parts of Los Angeles, Seattle, NYC or Miami? Or any number of South American cities? A better headline would be "Pervert in custody".

No, I think this one summed up the basis of the story quiet well. Not perfectly but certainly better than your option.

This man is under arrest for his (alleged) part as a major person in a child pornography ring which has been under investigation for quite a while. A tip to police that he had travelled to Thailand to *abuse* a child forms part of the charges.

quote

The investigation into Evers activities started in December 2014 when Homeland Security received a complaint regarding the sexual abuse of a minor in Bangkok, Thailand. Homeland Security identified the suspect as Clarence Edward Evers, Jr. Court documents also reveal Evers has travelled to Thailand during the summer since 2002 and allegedly used Facebook to contact this victim in December 2014. He is accused of sexually abusing the minor the summer of 2014.

... He faces several charges including production of child pornography, transportation of child pornography, receipt of child pornography, accessing with intent to view child pornography and foreign travel with the intent to engage in illicit sexual contact.

unquote

When he was arrested at his school, police seized computers from the school that he had used. Among lots and lots of material, they found he was stalking and grooming two children at that very school.

Let's be clear at the very least that the headline here is VERY misleading. He was not arrested for travelling to Thailand for sex tourism. Among the many charges against him is one that he travelled to Thailand to abuse and rape one specific boy that he had groomed on Facebook (and probably many, many others for 12 years).

It's still a better headline than the suggested alternative.

[pegman]

So what is new? Thauland has been promoting the sex trade for years. It is even promoted right here on Thai Visa.

Huh ??

Hey, the sex trade between consenting adults is one thing, and preying on kids is another. Both kinds can be found in this country but let's not confuse everything, OK ?

One factor that always bothers me about the average American attitude is that it tends to blend all the sexual issues into one big sin, and that has nothing to do with universal morality, while it has everything to do with WASP narrow-minded bigotry.

In American movies and series, you see couples having sex under the sheets, then it's over, they get out of the bed and, lo and behold, they are wearing their T-shirt and boxers :-)) ... just a small example of how ridiculous and hypocritical American 'culture' is when it comes to sex. You can't say this, you can't show that, you must talk about 'dating' as if the whole game was ony abou romance and marriage is presented as the only option for normal human beings ... on the other hands, look at the TV series especially, they talk of nothing else but sex.

But human beings are human, they are not designed by the church, no matter how hard the church tries to do just that. No matter how much pressure their societies try to put on them about sex, they will still go out and look for something to fulfill their urges. Once again, if these urges involve sex among consenting adults, I do not see why any authority should interfere.

All that and also the Porn Industry capital of the world. 555

[Rimmer]

Off topic flame removed

[Shadychris]

The arrestee may then be detained for specified periods of time for questioning to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to bring a charge. Police can apply to a magistrate for extension of that period if necessary. Once a a person has been charged, depending on the seriousness of the offence they will either be detained, in custody pending a court hearing or released on bail. That is the way it works in the UK anyway - and I think the US process is not too dissimilar.

Arrested without charge is usual for national security issues (in the UK).

They always said "We are arresting you on suspicion of ....." when they picked me up.

Then charged me when I reached the police station.

So it seems I might know a bit more about the UK process than you apparently do.

Actually, arrested without charge is usual for any matter - from shoplifting, drink driving right through to murder or terrorism. Nobody gets 'charged' for anything at the time of arrest outside of a police station - AFAIR the custody officer is the only person who can officially do that. You are now exactly confirming what I said by saying that you yourself were 'arrested on suspicion' of something, whereas your first post said it was suspicious that he was arrested without charge or evidence.

It's quite often the case that you could be released from custody again without charge should it be felt that there was not sufficient evidence at that time to charge you, or you could perhaps produce an alibi to prove that you were not involved in the alleged offence. As my previous post has since been endorsed as 'very knowledgeable' by an ex UK police officer, I rather doubt that you know a bit more about it than me - with the possible exception of being arrested for national security issues, to which I will bow to your obvious vast experience.

I note that you wrote 'They always said' - just how many times were you arrested on suspicion of being a threat to national security? And if you were then charged each time, how on earth were you allowed to remain at large to commit further similar offences???

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts. As I recall not so long ago you were making excuses for the guy who beat up his girlfriend and forced her to walk naked in the street, coming out with the theory that women appreciate such behaviour and respect men more for it. Now you are here defending the rights of a paedophile, seemingly more concerned that he may have been unlawfully arrested than happy that this predator is now out of action. Do you think those kids are lucky and grateful to have been taught about sex by an older and more experienced guy? It would seem from your often inflammatory comments that you are either a professional troll, or your own moral compass is in need of some serious adjustment. I rather hope it is the first one....

[malc4251]

JUST LOCK UP 10% OF AMERICA

[ChoakMyDee]

It's obvious he wasn't a gym teacher.

[Mitkof Island]

Nothing out of the ordinary. Thousands of guys like him all over Southeast Asia and Thailand. Pattaya is the base for most of these guys.

[thaibeachlovers]

The arrestee may then be detained for specified periods of time for questioning to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to bring a charge. Police can apply to a magistrate for extension of that period if necessary. Once a a person has been charged, depending on the seriousness of the offence they will either be detained, in custody pending a court hearing or released on bail. That is the way it works in the UK anyway - and I think the US process is not too dissimilar.

Arrested without charge is usual for national security issues (in the UK).

They always said "We are arresting you on suspicion of ....." when they picked me up.

Then charged me when I reached the police station.

So it seems I might know a bit more about the UK process than you apparently do.

Actually, arrested without charge is usual for any matter - from shoplifting, drink driving right through to murder or terrorism. Nobody gets 'charged' for anything at the time of arrest outside of a police station - AFAIR the custody officer is the only person who can officially do that. You are now exactly confirming what I said by saying that you yourself were 'arrested on suspicion' of something, whereas your first post said it was suspicious that he was arrested without charge or evidence.

It's quite often the case that you could be released from custody again without charge should it be felt that there was not sufficient evidence at that time to charge you, or you could perhaps produce an alibi to prove that you were not involved in the alleged offence. As my previous post has since been endorsed as 'very knowledgeable' by an ex UK police officer, I rather doubt that you know a bit more about it than me - with the possible exception of being arrested for national security issues, to which I will bow to your obvious vast experience.

I note that you wrote 'They always said' - just how many times were you arrested on suspicion of being a threat to national security? And if you were then charged each time, how on earth were you allowed to remain at large to commit further similar offences???

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts. As I recall not so long ago you were making excuses for the guy who beat up his girlfriend and forced her to walk naked in the street, coming out with the theory that women appreciate such behaviour and respect men more for it. Now you are here defending the rights of a paedophile, seemingly more concerned that he may have been unlawfully arrested than happy that this predator is now out of action. Do you think those kids are lucky and grateful to have been taught about sex by an older and more experienced guy? It would seem from your often inflammatory comments that you are either a professional troll, or your own moral compass is in need of some serious adjustment. I rather hope it is the first one....

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

[dageurreotype]

Nothing out of the ordinary. Thousands of guys like him all over Southeast Asia and Thailand. Pattaya is the base for most of these guys.

I had one looking exactly like this guy, but even heavier, complaining to me in an internet shop that the webcam didn't work and his newly met on line 'girlfriend' wanted to see what he looked like ..

[slippery snake]

The arrestee may then be detained for specified periods of time for questioning to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to bring a charge. Police can apply to a magistrate for extension of that period if necessary. Once a a person has been charged, depending on the seriousness of the offence they will either be detained, in custody pending a court hearing or released on bail. That is the way it works in the UK anyway - and I think the US process is not too dissimilar.

Arrested without charge is usual for national security issues (in the UK).

They always said "We are arresting you on suspicion of ....." when they picked me up.

Then charged me when I reached the police station.

So it seems I might know a bit more about the UK process than you apparently do.

Actually, arrested without charge is usual for any matter - from shoplifting, drink driving right through to murder or terrorism. Nobody gets 'charged' for anything at the time of arrest outside of a police station - AFAIR the custody officer is the only person who can officially do that. You are now exactly confirming what I said by saying that you yourself were 'arrested on suspicion' of something, whereas your first post said it was suspicious that he was arrested without charge or evidence.

It's quite often the case that you could be released from custody again without charge should it be felt that there was not sufficient evidence at that time to charge you, or you could perhaps produce an alibi to prove that you were not involved in the alleged offence. As my previous post has since been endorsed as 'very knowledgeable' by an ex UK police officer, I rather doubt that you know a bit more about it than me - with the possible exception of being arrested for national security issues, to which I will bow to your obvious vast experience.

I note that you wrote 'They always said' - just how many times were you arrested on suspicion of being a threat to national security? And if you were then charged each time, how on earth were you allowed to remain at large to commit further similar offences???

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts. As I recall not so long ago you were making excuses for the guy who beat up his girlfriend and forced her to walk naked in the street, coming out with the theory that women appreciate such behaviour and respect men more for it. Now you are here defending the rights of a paedophile, seemingly more concerned that he may have been unlawfully arrested than happy that this predator is now out of action. Do you think those kids are lucky and grateful to have been taught about sex by an older and more experienced guy? It would seem from your often inflammatory comments that you are either a professional troll, or your own moral compass is in need of some serious adjustment. I rather hope it is the first one....

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

No one knows if he did it or not ?? WHAT, he was bragging about what he was doing on facebook or internet, whatever,, that's pretty conclusive evidence.

[chrisinth]

One in a miliion...hard to get very excited by this even thought it is a righteous action.

How true.

I sincerely hope this is going to develop into a major investigation, with every recipient of these emails also investigated to the full.

Including every person in the recipients contact lists.

Until the authorities throw out the big net, arresting one person for these crimes makes little difference to anyone not already involved in his sexual attacks and possible further victims.

The above said, i would be very surprised if these actions were not already taken before the story has been broadcast by the media. Or rather, hopeful these actions have been taken.................

[thaibeachlovers]

Arrested without charge is usual for national security issues (in the UK).

They always said "We are arresting you on suspicion of ....." when they picked me up.

Then charged me when I reached the police station.

So it seems I might know a bit more about the UK process than you apparently do.

Actually, arrested without charge is usual for any matter - from shoplifting, drink driving right through to murder or terrorism. Nobody gets 'charged' for anything at the time of arrest outside of a police station - AFAIR the custody officer is the only person who can officially do that. You are now exactly confirming what I said by saying that you yourself were 'arrested on suspicion' of something, whereas your first post said it was suspicious that he was arrested without charge or evidence.

It's quite often the case that you could be released from custody again without charge should it be felt that there was not sufficient evidence at that time to charge you, or you could perhaps produce an alibi to prove that you were not involved in the alleged offence. As my previous post has since been endorsed as 'very knowledgeable' by an ex UK police officer, I rather doubt that you know a bit more about it than me - with the possible exception of being arrested for national security issues, to which I will bow to your obvious vast experience.

I note that you wrote 'They always said' - just how many times were you arrested on suspicion of being a threat to national security? And if you were then charged each time, how on earth were you allowed to remain at large to commit further similar offences???

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts. As I recall not so long ago you were making excuses for the guy who beat up his girlfriend and forced her to walk naked in the street, coming out with the theory that women appreciate such behaviour and respect men more for it. Now you are here defending the rights of a paedophile, seemingly more concerned that he may have been unlawfully arrested than happy that this predator is now out of action. Do you think those kids are lucky and grateful to have been taught about sex by an older and more experienced guy? It would seem from your often inflammatory comments that you are either a professional troll, or your own moral compass is in need of some serious adjustment. I rather hope it is the first one....

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

No one knows if he did it or not ?? WHAT, he was bragging about what he was doing on facebook or internet, whatever,, that's pretty conclusive evidence.

If bragging is counted as truth, there are probably more special forces guys in Pattaya than ever there were in the real armies! I had one guy tell me he was the Dali Llama- was he telling me the truth?

[MaeJoMTB]

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts.

Yes, and that theme is equal rights under the law for men.

Men have the right to a fair trial, with the usual rules of evidence and due process.

In the case of this man, he would need to be questioned to see if he had an alibi, and where he was at the time of any crimes committed.

Victims would need to be identified, they would then be required to make suitable complaints, and pick the man out of a line up.

Edited February 14, 2016 by MaeJoMTB

[HLover]

It always amazes me that guys like this boast about their exploits, and on facebook, no less. If you are doing something dodgy, rule #1, SHUT THE <deleted> UP about it.

The 9 to 15 reference in the story is kind of vague. I am assuming it refers to the ages of his 'friends'. Sick bastard. Guess a lot of parents in Conecuh County are going to be worried now if that perp was teaching their kids.

Your right, he should be boasting about his impressive second chin, my God - I've never seen one with such girth! Edited February 14, 2016 by HLover

[wandasloan]

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

What you claim is possible is actually completely impossible. He cannot be released without charge. He is currently charged with

• production of child pornography
• transportation of child pornography
• receipt of child pornography
• accessing with intent to view child pornography
• foreign travel with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct

There will probably be further charges as investigations continue involving the child paedo ring he was allegedly involved in.

[thaibeachlovers]

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

What you claim is possible is actually completely impossible. He cannot be released without charge. He is currently charged with

• production of child pornography
• transportation of child pornography
• receipt of child pornography
• accessing with intent to view child pornography
• foreign travel with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct

There will probably be further charges as investigations continue involving the child paedo ring he was allegedly involved in.

OK I miswrote. He has been charged but he may yet be released as all charges may be unproven. What happened to the most important principle of justice "innocent till PROVEN guilty". He may be guilty, but as I said none of US know. Even you say ALLEGEDLY.

[wandasloan]

OK I miswrote. He has been charged but he may yet be released as all charges may be unproven. What happened to the most important principle of justice "innocent till PROVEN guilty". He may be guilty, but as I said none of US know. Even you say ALLEGEDLY.

I'm pretty sure you misunderstand how this works. The courts must assume he is innocent until they are convinced by evidence of guilt.

No one else is under any such prohibition - not the police (in this case US federal investigators from three different departments who declared repeatedly he is guilty of numerous crimes). Not his school board that removed him from the classroom last August. Certainly not you, and certainly not me.

Here: He is obviously guilty of numerous, continuing crimes against children, specifically in Thailand, including multiple, serial rape. He is locked up, without bail. I hope that status continues until he dies.

Like me, you are entitled to your opinion even if it is the completely bizarre and unbelievably ridiculous claim that this man is innocent of multiple and continuing rapes of children.

In the case of this man, he would need to be questioned to see if he had an alibi, and where he was at the time of any crimes committed.

Victims would need to be identified, they would then be required to make suitable complaints, and pick the man out of a line up.

You wish.

Edited February 14, 2016 by wandasloan

[thesetat2013]

Nothing out of the ordinary. Thousands of guys like him all over Southeast Asia and Thailand. Pattaya is the base for most of these guys.

I had one looking exactly like this guy, but even heavier, complaining to me in an internet shop that the webcam didn't work and his newly met on line 'girlfriend' wanted to see what he looked like ..

So the way you see it is that just because this guy complained about needing webcam for the woman he was chatting, that this automatically made him a sexpat or sex tourist or child molester? Lots of men and women meet online first before meeting for real. I met my wife of 5 years now online and saw her in cam before we ever met. So in your eyes I am a sexpat for doing this? You need to wake up and smell the coffee. Times have changed with social interactions. You apparently are hiding something since you are so quick to point the fingers at others with such disgust

[Shadychris]

Actually, arrested without charge is usual for any matter - from shoplifting, drink driving right through to murder or terrorism. Nobody gets 'charged' for anything at the time of arrest outside of a police station - AFAIR the custody officer is the only person who can officially do that. You are now exactly confirming what I said by saying that you yourself were 'arrested on suspicion' of something, whereas your first post said it was suspicious that he was arrested without charge or evidence.

It's quite often the case that you could be released from custody again without charge should it be felt that there was not sufficient evidence at that time to charge you, or you could perhaps produce an alibi to prove that you were not involved in the alleged offence. As my previous post has since been endorsed as 'very knowledgeable' by an ex UK police officer, I rather doubt that you know a bit more about it than me - with the possible exception of being arrested for national security issues, to which I will bow to your obvious vast experience.

I note that you wrote 'They always said' - just how many times were you arrested on suspicion of being a threat to national security? And if you were then charged each time, how on earth were you allowed to remain at large to commit further similar offences???

However to return to topic, what I find more worrying and disheartening is that you seem to be more concerned about the 'rights' of this individual, than you do about the young victims of this man's actions.

This seems to be an underlying theme in your posts. As I recall not so long ago you were making excuses for the guy who beat up his girlfriend and forced her to walk naked in the street, coming out with the theory that women appreciate such behaviour and respect men more for it. Now you are here defending the rights of a paedophile, seemingly more concerned that he may have been unlawfully arrested than happy that this predator is now out of action. Do you think those kids are lucky and grateful to have been taught about sex by an older and more experienced guy? It would seem from your often inflammatory comments that you are either a professional troll, or your own moral compass is in need of some serious adjustment. I rather hope it is the first one....

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

No one knows if he did it or not ?? WHAT, he was bragging about what he was doing on facebook or internet, whatever,, that's pretty conclusive evidence.

If bragging is counted as truth, there are probably more special forces guys in Pattaya than ever there were in the real armies! I had one guy tell me he was the Dali Llama- was he telling me the truth?

Well many inadequate people will brag (lie) about things to try and improve their image to others, but bragging about being a paedophile? really???

Given that he is already charged with having child pornography on his computer, it would seem pretty certain that what he has been writing on social media is in fact the truth.

I wonder if you would be so quick to leap to his defence if your children had been attending the school where he was working?

[MaeJoMTB]

^^

My children know better than to be alone with anyone (except close family), anywhere.

Most Thais play the game exactly the same way.

My teen daughter knows better than to get on a Songtaw or school bus, if it's just her and the driver.

And I remember when I was first employed as a school teacher in the UK.

Our head of department said, please ensure you are never alone with any of the kids, makes for an easy life.

He was right,

Teachers shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can be accused.

Children shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can be abused.

There's safety in numbers.

Edited February 15, 2016 by MaeJoMTB

[ev1lchris]

I read an article about people like him. It was about people with pedophile tendencies who acknowledge them but refrain from acting out. It might be a product of nature like how someone is straight or gay.

I would like to see him neutralized so he can not continue this type of behavior. However, I do not think he should be put through hell.

[thaibeachlovers]

OK I miswrote. He has been charged but he may yet be released as all charges may be unproven. What happened to the most important principle of justice "innocent till PROVEN guilty". He may be guilty, but as I said none of US know. Even you say ALLEGEDLY.

I'm pretty sure you misunderstand how this works. The courts must assume he is innocent until they are convinced by evidence of guilt.

No one else is under any such prohibition - not the police (in this case US federal investigators from three different departments who declared repeatedly he is guilty of numerous crimes). Not his school board that removed him from the classroom last August. Certainly not you, and certainly not me.

Here: He is obviously guilty of numerous, continuing crimes against children, specifically in Thailand, including multiple, serial rape. He is locked up, without bail. I hope that status continues until he dies.

Like me, you are entitled to your opinion even if it is the completely bizarre and unbelievably ridiculous claim that this man is innocent of multiple and continuing rapes of children.

In the case of this man, he would need to be questioned to see if he had an alibi, and where he was at the time of any crimes committed.

Victims would need to be identified, they would then be required to make suitable complaints, and pick the man out of a line up.

You wish.

How on earth do you make He may be guilty, but as I said none of US know. Even you say ALLEGEDLY. into the completely bizarre and unbelievably ridiculous claim that this man is innocent of multiple and continuing rapes of children.

You need to stop accusing me of saying things I did not say.

If you do not, I shall assume you are flaming.

[thaibeachlovers]

You seem to have missed the point. NO ONE on HERE knows if he did it or not, even you, though you seem to believe he is guilty.

How many that have been baying to torture him will come on here and apologise if he is released without charge. No doubt the only thing we will hear is that "there's no smoke without fire" and such rubbish.

No one knows if he did it or not ?? WHAT, he was bragging about what he was doing on facebook or internet, whatever,, that's pretty conclusive evidence.

If bragging is counted as truth, there are probably more special forces guys in Pattaya than ever there were in the real armies! I had one guy tell me he was the Dali Llama- was he telling me the truth?

Well many inadequate people will brag (lie) about things to try and improve their image to others, but bragging about being a paedophile? really???

Given that he is already charged with having child pornography on his computer, it would seem pretty certain that what he has been writing on social media is in fact the truth.

I wonder if you would be so quick to leap to his defence if your children had been attending the school where he was working?

I haven't been "leaping to his defence" at all ( I have no idea whether he is guilty or not and neither do you nor anyone else on this thread ). His guilt or innocence will not be proven on here, but in a court of law.

Frankly, if the armchair sadists on here can brag about the vile things they would do to another human being, I am prepared to believe that an innocent man could brag about being a paedophile.

[connda]

Well, if the idiot would have said he wanted to go to Thailand to have sex with luscious, smooth-skinned, brown Thai women, 18 years of age or older, I guess he's have no problem now.

Sex between consenting adults? That's one thing. But 'boys'. Throw him in jail. Throw away the keys.

Best to stick to a sex partner 30 or older. No way to 'mistake' your partner as 'underage'. Idiot.

[connda]

^^

My children know better than to be alone with anyone (except close family), anywhere.

Most Thais play the game exactly the same way.

My teen daughter knows better than to get on a Songtaw or school bus, if it's just her and the driver.

And I remember when I was first employed as a school teacher in the UK.

Our head of department said, please ensure you are never alone with any of the kids, makes for an easy life.

He was right,

Teachers shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can be accused.

Children shouldn't put themselves in a position where they can be abused.

There's safety in numbers.

"My children know better than to be alone with anyone (except close family), anywhere..."

Wish that worked in my extended family.

My sister-in-law's husband was boffing his 12 year old step-daughter (her daughter, my niece, and the SOB is in jail); and

My sister-in-law's uncle was boffing his 6 year old niece (her daugher, my niece, and the SOB is in jail - so may they both rot - but that's not the way law works in the West). Yeah, both of my sister-in-law's daughters were sexually abused by older family members. Talk about sick bastards!

So safety within families is a little overrated. Even in the civilized Western 'republic' of the United States and other Western bastions of morality.

Now education? Like scream your head off the minute you think you're being touched in an inappropriate manner? Screammmmmm! I have no use for pedophiles. Society shouldn't either. But then again, how many pedophiles are in the upper echelon of our 'republic?' Slick Willie? Jeffrey Epstein and Pedophile Island. Don't take my word for it, Google it. It's public record. Sick F88ks!!!

Oh, wait a minute. Now 'non-progressive-liberal of me'. The victims were 'asking for it.' Yeah. I forgot.

Edited February 15, 2016 by connda

[bkktrapper]

NAMBLAs latest recruit.