Reporting the Sexual Abuse of a Child

My question involves child abuse or neglect in the State of: Pennsylvania Default
I need help. I began chatting with a local girl from tinder, through text. It was highly sexual dialogue, and gradually became more depraved. I went along with her depravity, interested in how far she would take it. The conversation lead to sexual acts she performed with her four year old daughter. I became instantlyill. I screenshot everything, and didn't let on about my repulsion, because something needs to happen. She even promised video footage. She is a local girl, I have her Facebook account. Where can I turn for help? Should I be concerned of possession of such material that I'm presenting as evidence to police? Please, and suggestions or information on how to handle this urgently is greatly appreciated.

Go straight to the police - NOW - and make a report. Show them.

(I'm unclear as to why this question has to be asked at all)

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

Go straight to the police - NOW - and make a report. Show them.

(I'm unclear as to why this question has to be asked at all)

---

Reading his question made me throw up in my mouth a little. Good grief. POLICE! NOW! Think of this poor child. TAKE IT TO THEM NOW!

If this post is true, then I think it more likely that the OP is being played.

But ... that being said, reporting the matter to the police WOULD be the thing to do.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

(I'm unclear as to why this question has to be asked at all)

---

I wonder that also. If you play chess, bishop attack is an annoyance influence opening in the game. Interesting user name.

Maybe this story is true but I have my doubts. Maybe it's a trial balloon or just a troll.

I really wish this was some sort of fabrication on my part, but it's not. The messages, photos, and videos I have of her clearly indicate I'm not being played. It's completely ruined my last two days. Going to police, I'll keep you updated.

You're still here...why aren't you going to the police?

Quote:

---

Quoting eerelations

---

You're still here...why aren't you going to the police?

---

E...as long as someone remains logged in they show as "here" even if they are not.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

E...as long as someone remains logged in they show as "here" even if they are not.

---

Good to know, thanks.

Patty had been working on the boards just before she went into the hospital for the last time. Her SO obviously had plenty of more important things on his mind than logging her out. As a result she showed as being "on" one of the boards four days after her death. Spooked the hell out of me.

Police are alerted, and turning it over to CPS. I had to be 100% sure of everything before submitting a report. Hopefully I didn't incriminate myself in the process, as my intentions were to gain as much content as possible. I don't know if it will be sufficient, as I don't know the laws surrounding text messages as evidence. The messages are haunting, and she is the most abysmal, abhorrent person I've ever encountered.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

Police are alerted, and turning it over to CPS. I had to be 100% sure of everything before submitting a report. Hopefully I didn't incriminate myself in the process, as my intentions were to gain as much content as possible. I don't know if it will be sufficient, as I don't know the laws surrounding text messages as evidence. The messages are haunting, and she is the most abysmal, abhorrent person I've ever encountered.

---

You did the right thing. You may have saved that little girl's life and future. Lesson learned I hope, about online sexual encounters...

In Reply#6 you state "The messages, photos, and videos I have of her clearly indicate I'm not being played." In Reply# 11 you state " I don't know if it will be sufficient, as I don't know the laws surrounding text messages as evidence. "

Which is it ?

I don't see that the statements are mutually exclusive. He could have seen messages, images and texts, and still not know if that is sufficient to prosecute the woman. Heck, I don't know that it's enough, either. Tracing back the other party may be no easy task, and if the other party is in another city, county or state, there will be additional issues involved in both the investigation and identification of the suspect - not to mention a question of jurisdiction.

OP said she was a local girl in his original post. Go back and read his posts, one after the other, and then tell us what you cop nose tells you. Would he have incriminated himself receiving photos and videos of a child? It's all BS. His words are all wrong. Just my opinion of course.

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

OP said she was a local girl in his original post. Go back and read his posts, one after the other, and then tell us what you cop nose tells you. Would he have incriminated himself receiving photos and videos of a child? It's all BS. His words are all wrong. Just my opinion of course.

---

Actually, after re-reading the original post, I think you have a point.

Depending on exactly what was said and when, it may not be too much of a stretch to believe he actually (and actively) encouraged the woman.

He did say he encouraged the woman to be more depraved...but unless he spelled out that what he meant by "depraved" was for the woman to have sex with a four-year-old girl, then it's quite possible that having sex with a four-year-old girl was not actually what he meant by "depraved." (And yes, "depravity" can mean a lot of different things to different people, and many of these meanings aren't illegal, or even particularly immoral.) He also said that when she posted herself having sex with a four-year-old girl, he said he immediately became ill (indicating that he probably didn't mean for the woman to do this, he was thinking of some other kind of depravity), and he saved those pics because he thought he may need them if he wished to do something about this sick-making thing he saw.

Makes sense to me.

Quote:

---

Quoting eerelations

---

He did say he encouraged the woman to be more depraved...but unless he spelled out that what he meant by "depraved" was for the woman to have sex with a four-year-old girl, then it's quite possible that having sex with a four-year-old girl was not actually what he meant by "depraved." (And yes, "depravity" can mean a lot of different things to different people, and many of these meanings aren't illegal, or even particularly immoral.) He also said that when she posted herself having sex with a four-year-old girl, he said he immediately became ill (indicating that he probably didn't mean for the woman to do this, he was thinking of some other kind of depravity), and he saved those pics because he thought he may need them if he wished to do something about this sick-making thing he saw.

Makes sense to me.

---

It would however also make sense for anyone "caught" in the same situation to of course deny feeling anything other than sick to the stomach.

(Just how the conversation switched to child porn in the first place is ... curious. How does that even happen without both parties at least being verbally curious about it?)

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

It would however also make sense for anyone "caught" in the same situation to of course deny feeling anything other than sick to the stomach.

(Just how the conversation switched to child porn in the first place is ... curious. How does that even happen without both parties at least being verbally curious about it?)

---

I dunno...I read it the way that erelations does. That the guy was into being "bad" on the internet until it got to the point where a child was involved, and then it was no longer ok. I really do not think that someone would be willing to get the police involved if they were actually soliciting child porn.

Doggy, he didn't say he talked to her about child porn, he said he encouraged her to be more depraved. That could mean a hundred different things. He might even have just been saying banal and general things like "Go on go on do more sexy stuff!" and she took that to mean have sex with her child (the kind of person who would send out pics of herself having sex with a child is def the kind of person who would think "more sexy stuff" might mean "have sex with a child") - and when he saw it he became ill and thought "Well I sure didn't mean that."

The above is based solely on what he said in his original thread - and we really don't have anything else to go on except that.

And I agree with llworking - if OP did indeed explicitly tell this woman to send him pics of herself having sex with her child, I seriously doubt he would then tell the cops about it.

My meaning of not being played, is that I know the person on the other end is indeed the person she says she is. I asked her to do specific things, non sexual, to prove her identity. This is standard for me. Additionally, I am certain she wasn't lying about sexual assaults on her daughter. She sent photographic images of herself in urine and excrement, expressed interest in bestiality and incestuous scenarios, so it wasn't a big leap.
She does live in a neighboring county. To me that's local, jurisdiction wise may be a different story. I don't know.
I never received photos or videos of her with her daughter, I said she offered.
I didn't necessarily encourage her, but I didn't let on, and asked questions in an effort to maximize damage against her.
It was innocent, and fun initially, until she crossed a line and I stumbled into this nightmare. My goal is to get the child away from this monster.
Why people are calling bullshit, is beyond me.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

It would however also make sense for anyone "caught" in the same situation to of course deny feeling anything other than sick to the stomach.

(Just how the conversation switched to child porn in the first place is ... curious. How does that even happen without both parties at least being verbally curious about it?)

---

Good question. She asked me for nude photographs repeatedly. I declined. I said my nephews were here, and I couldn't, which was a lie. I don't have nephews. She responded that she plays with herself in front of her daughter all the time, and sometimes she helps. It got worse from there, but that is how is was initiated.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

My meaning of not being played, is that I know the person on the other end is indeed the person she says she is. I asked her to do specific things, non sexual, to prove her identity. This is standard for me. Additionally, I am certain she wasn't lying about sexual assaults on her daughter. She sent photographic images of herself in urine and excrement, expressed interest in bestiality and incestuous scenarios, so it wasn't a big leap.
She does live in a neighboring county. To me that's local, jurisdiction wise may be a different story. I don't know.
I never received photos or videos of her with her daughter, I said she offered.
I didn't necessarily encourage her, but I didn't let on, and asked questions in an effort to maximize damage against her.
It was innocent, and fun initially, until she crossed a line and I stumbled into this nightmare. My goal is to get the child away from this monster.
Why people are calling bullshit, is beyond me.


Good question. She asked me for nude photographs repeatedly. I declined. I said my nephews were here, and I couldn't, which was a lie. I don't have nephews. She responded that she plays with herself in front of her daughter all the time, and sometimes she helps. It got worse from there, but that is how is was initiated.

---

Each time you post I am more convinced that you are either a pedophile, a pervert, or worse and what is worse than a pedophile? I'm finished here. The other members can buy into this crap if they want to.

Imbecile.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

Imbecile.

---

A crack in the bishop attack opening. Checkmate.

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

Each time you post I am more convinced that you are either a pedophile, a pervert, or worse and what is worse than a pedophile? I'm finished here. The other members can buy into this crap if they want to.

---

I completely disagree.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

Actually, after re-reading the original post, I think you have a point.

Depending on exactly what was said and when, it may not be too much of a stretch to believe he actually (and actively) encouraged the woman.

---

Maybe ... Clearly he was engaging in raucous <gag> banter. But, no matter how much he may have asked for images, he did not commit the act. The woman on the other end appears to have asked if he wanted to see what she has done to her daughter, not whether he wanted her to do it.

So, doesn't much matter, and I still don't see the statements as mutually exclusive. I have often seen reporting parties present info and ask if it is enough. Usually what they have is not sufficient to legally take action as most people overestimate the strength of what they think is evidence. No way to know for sure here.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

My meaning of not being played, is that I know the person on the other end is indeed the person she says she is. I asked her to do specific things, non sexual, to prove her identity. This is standard for me. Additionally, I am certain she wasn't lying about sexual assaults on her daughter. She sent photographic images of herself in urine and excrement, expressed interest in bestiality and incestuous scenarios, so it wasn't a big leap.
She does live in a neighboring county. To me that's local, jurisdiction wise may be a different story. I don't know.
I never received photos or videos of her with her daughter, I said she offered.
I didn't necessarily encourage her, but I didn't let on, and asked questions in an effort to maximize damage against her.
It was innocent, and fun initially, until she crossed a line and I stumbled into this nightmare. My goal is to get the child away from this monster.
Why people are calling bullshit, is beyond me.


Good question. She asked me for nude photographs repeatedly. I declined. I said my nephews were here, and I couldn't, which was a lie. I don't have nephews. She responded that she plays with herself in front of her daughter all the time, and sometimes she helps. It got worse from there, but that is how is was initiated.

---

Wait ... so, there are no images of the little girl involved in any sexual acts? If there are no such images, then it is unlikely that any action can be taken based solely on texts. The police or CPS can certainly ask some questions, but, their ability to get a search warrant or make an arrest is diminished.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

Maybe ... Clearly he was engaging in raucous <gag> banter. But, no matter how much he may have asked for images, he did not commit the act. The woman on the other end appears to have asked if he wanted to see what she has done to her daughter, not whether he wanted her to do it.

So, doesn't much matter, and I still don't see the statements as mutually exclusive. I have often seen reporting parties present info and ask if it is enough. Usually what they have is not sufficient to legally take action as most people overestimate the strength of what they think is evidence. No way to know for sure here.

---

This is very true. Absolutely.

Quote:

---

Wait ... so, there are no images of the little girl involved in any sexual acts? If there are no such images, then it is unlikely that any action can be taken based solely on texts. The police or CPS can certainly ask some questions, but, their ability to get a search warrant or make an arrest is diminished.

---

I'd think greatly diminished, yes? For some unfathomable reason people do lie online, and they lie about the most outrageous things.

We see it here a lot, unfortunately.

There are some sick people that engage in sexual chats. And it also appears there are sick people who get their jollies getting a rise out of others who engage in sexual chats. Personally, I have never once thought that there could be any enjoyment in such expression ... kind of repulsive to me.

In Reply#6 you state "The messages, photos, and videos I have of her clearly indicate I'm not being played." In reply #21 ""I am certain she wasn't lying about sexual assaults on her daughter. She sent photographic images of herself in urine and excrement, expressed interest in bestiality and incestuous scenarios, so it wasn't a big leap." and "I never received photos or videos of her with her daughter, I said she offered."

He "assumes" she was doing what he thought she was doing because he is "certain she wasn't lying about sexual assaults on her daughter." He said she "expressed interest in bestiality and incestuous scenarios, so it wasn't a big leap" I wonder how old he is. He lies to her but he doesn't think she lies to him.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

There are some sick people that engage in sexual chats. And it also appears there are sick people who get their jollies getting a rise out of others who engage in sexual chats. Personally, I have never once thought that there could be any enjoyment in such expression ... kind of repulsive to me.

---

I'm all for two consenting adults doing whatever it is they want to do via the Internet but the very second it infringes on someone else's rights, I have a problem with it.

The child and mother have been separated, as per the safety plan that is in effect. There will be no contact until the investigation is over.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

The child and mother have been separated, as per the safety plan that is in effect. There will be no contact until the investigation is over.

---

How did you come by this information?

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

How did you come by this information?

---

I would like to know that also ?

I was interviewed by a detective, and that was the information he gave me.

He also said no charges were filed at this point, and the daughter will be interviewed and medically examined. He doesn't expect much, as she is three years old, and has a learning disability, but they have people trained for dealing with such matters.

Quote:

---

Quoting bishop_attack

---

I was interviewed by a detective, and that was the information he gave me.

He also said no charges were filed at this point, and the daughter will be interviewed and medically examined. He doesn't expect much, as she is three years old, and has a learning disability, but they have people trained for dealing with such matters.

---

Uh huh.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mercy&Grace

---

I would like to know that also ?

---

You're obviously thinking the exact same thing I am ;)

Dogmatique, Yes My Dear, I am.

Which is?