> Lol. Please, stop for just a second, and imagine that situation. This guy responds to a personal ad for sex. Gets a response that says "i'm 13" and a picture

> Lol. Please, stop for just a second, and imagine that situation. This guy responds to a personal ad for sex. Gets a response that says "i'm 13" and a picture of a middle-aged man. Goes over to the poster's house, is greeted by that same middle-aged man, and goes inside. You're imagining situations. If you get back to reality you'll find that the convicted sex offender got a response from a 13 year old girl stating repeatedly and quite clearly that she was 13 years old, and he not only acknowledged she was 13 years old old but also decided it was in his best interests to try to have sex with a 13 year old girl. I mean, are you so desperate to defend a conviced sex offender who was caught in the act that you even feel compelled to claim that pics people send through dating sites are the absolute source of truth regarding who that person is and is represented? Really? > I'm already tired of hearing you say this. You're in a discussion on how a convicted sex offender was caught by the police trying to have sex with a 13 year old girl he met online. If you are tired of hearing the facts for whatever reason, whether they are inconvenient to you or you simply prefer to cherry-pick info that makes you feel comfortable, then that issue has nothing to do with this discussion or the topic, but it's a personal issue you need to address. > Look, I'm not saying Hambrick had no ill intentions. The guy was caught trying to meet a 13 year old girl for sex, while fully aware that she was 13 years old. Of course he had ill intentions. That's why he, and a bunch of other sex offenders, were caught and trialed and sentenced by a court of law in the same sting.