reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Okay, so there was no penis sighting by Sorgen, no. I understand that whatever happened has already happened, but now it's a police thing. We're just having a conversation, and basically, you're not going to talk to a 13-year-old again, right? This is the last time you're doing it, everything's deactivated and done. You're not sending a penis picture to one again, are you? No. And there will be no mishaps like before. No more mishaps with my niece, right? Sorgen? Okay, they don't live here anymore. You're not going to rub her butt again? She's not going to brush her penis again? No. Okay. That's what's going on.

Why do you want to harm children? What is wrong with you? It shouldn't be about gender or profession; it's about the actions being taken.

Is your name Mohammed Daniel? We're from a team called Leisure Child Protection. We stop people like you from grooming children online. You’ve been communicating with someone you believe is a 14-year-old in a sexual and coercive manner. I have a few questions for you. Is this your chat log? Is this your number? Do you know the age of sexual consent in the UK? Do you have any children living with you? You mentioned you've been contacting children online for about a month. How many children are you speaking to?

Wazif is confronted for inappropriate behavior with a child. He is warned about the legal consequences of asking for naked images from minors. Wazif expresses a desire for romantic interactions and playing games with a 12-year-old. He is caught lying and his phone is taken as evidence by the police. The conversation ends with Wazif being confronted by authorities.

The speaker confronts Mohammed, asking him who he is here to meet. Mohammed admits that he is here to meet a thirteen-year-old. The speaker questions him about the legal age of consent and whether he has said anything inappropriate to the child. Mohammed admits to saying a few inappropriate things but denies finding it funny. The speaker asks about Mohammed's job, and he reveals that he works in a hospital as a healthcare assistant. The speaker questions whether Mohammed has daily contact with children, to which he denies. The speaker presents evidence of Mohammed's conversations and pictures with the child, accusing him of grooming. Mohammed denies planning anything and claims he didn't think it was inappropriate. The speaker insists on honesty and warns Mohammed about the consequences.

Delete it out your phone. You're taking mad pictures of the little fucking girls. Those are babies. Delete all of it. I told you I was watching them do it for the longest. You take and pick them girls. It's, like, fucking 11 years old, bro. Delete the delete before I beat the jacket off you, bro. No. Don't hit him yet. Don't hit him yet. Delete it first. Let him delete it first. No. That's robbery. Let him delete it first, bro. Let him delete it first. I told you I knew what the fuck I was saying, bro. Where's the police at? I told you I was watching them do it for the longest. Delete it. Go to your delete. Get out. Get out.

In this video, Gordon confronts Christopher Mark Allen about his online conversations with a 13-year-old girl named Zoe. Christopher initially denies any explicit intent and claims he was just being nice, but Gordon challenges his explanations and points out inconsistencies. Eventually, Christopher admits to finding Zoe attractive and wanting to have sex with her, mentioning plans to meet up and book hotel rooms. The conversation also involves Mark being questioned about his involvement with child pornography on Telegram. Mark admits to receiving and clicking on links to child pornographic content, but claims to have deleted them immediately. The conversation highlights Mark's curiosity and his history of watching adult pornography. The person questioning Mark expresses concern and emphasizes the need to identify and stop those who produce and distribute child pornography. Additionally, the video discusses a conversation about child pornography found on a phone, leading to plans to involve law enforcement and the DA's office. The individual is informed that their phone will be taken as evidence, and a search warrant will be obtained. The detectives will investigate further, and the individual may get their phone back if everything checks out. The conversation concludes with the individual being informed about the process and potential outcomes.

The speaker, Chris, admits to engaging in inappropriate conversations with a 13-year-old girl online. He claims that he never had any intention of meeting her or engaging in any illegal activities. He acknowledges that he made mistakes and played into her fantasies but insists that he never acted on them. The person he is speaking to, Gordon, questions his actions and highlights the seriousness of the situation. They discuss the need for accountability and honesty. Chris agrees to let Gordon and one other person into his home to further discuss the issue. The conversation touches on various topics, including the girl's age, potential meetups, and explicit messages exchanged.

The speaker confronts an individual, accusing them of grooming a child and planning to have sex with her, referencing condoms. The speaker claims to have evidence despite the individual possibly deleting it. The speaker questions the individual's early morning activities outside a flat and accuses them of using fake accounts to trap kids. They mention sending live locations and pictures of a front door. The speaker states the individual is getting arrested and remanded, as the police are present. They tell the individual to leave kids alone.

What’s your name? What are you doing here? I’m texting a friend. Who are you texting? A 15-year-old. No, I’m not. Yes, you are. If you don’t stand here and talk, I’ll call the police. Let me see your phone. You’re here to meet a 15-year-old. Where are you going? You can’t just leave.

It’s been twenty years, and nothing has changed. You’ve accomplished nothing while the country suffers. You’re just making empty threats. You called me a child rapist; that’s crossing the line. I’m coming for you and your family. You think you can say that and get away with it? I’ll find you. I’m offering $10,000 for your location. You’re hiding behind an account, but we’ll see how brave you are face to face. You accuse me of being a pedophile; why are you so defensive? If you’re not guilty, just move on. Enough of this. What’s happening with the tunnels in your house?

Why would you involve a 14-year-old in this? I'm sorry, but it's too late for apologies. You’ve been in Mexico for about two months, studying at a university on an education visa. What if this girl had asked you to stop? You’re in serious trouble. I don’t care how sorry you feel now. Will this child get a second chance? No, because of your actions. You’re not listening to me. I’m talking. The authorities have already been contacted. You can’t just call them back and say it’s okay because you apologized. You need to face the consequences of what you’ve done.

Please help me, please. Stop. No one's going to help you. I was wrong. Please stop me. Stop eating now. Stay calm. How many other children have you harmed? I just came here as a friend. You’re not going to win. Call the police; they’ll be here soon. You’ll be arrested. You’re known around here. You’ll be in a cell, away from our children. What would you have done to a child? You’re lucky we intercepted you. Stay calm. You’re wrong. Do not kick me. The police will arrive shortly. Stay there.

I'm here because there are transcripts, about 70 or 80 pages, of your chat conversations with a minor. It includes a selfie you sent to a 15-year-old boy on Valentine's Day. We want to go over these conversations. This is for everyone's safety, and for documentation purposes. I'm trying to show you here, Kevin, that you, a sixth-grade teacher, were talking to a 15-year-old boy online and having phone sex with him. The boy's name is Josh. You guys met on Daddy Hunt, then moved over to text messaging. He told you he was 15, homeschooled, and looking for gay guys to talk to. You acknowledged his age multiple times. I want you to tell me the truth, because you are a dangerous man.

The speaker confronts an individual, accusing them of grooming a child and planning to have sex with her, referencing condoms. The speaker claims to have evidence despite the individual possibly deleting it. The speaker questions the individual's early morning activities outside a flat and accuses them of trying to trap kids using different accounts. They mention sending live locations and pictures of a front door. The speaker states the individual is getting arrested and remanded, as Manchester police are present. The speaker repeatedly demands the individual leave children alone.

Here we go. Watch your legs; you keep kicking them out. How many children are you talking to? Just this one. I don’t do that. When you’re fasting, does that make you speak to children? No, I don’t do that. Explain what you don’t do because I know you speak to children online. This proves you can do that. Why were you going to meet a child? I can’t do that. You’ve asked this child to delete messages, haven’t you? No. I have all the messages you sent, including asking for pictures. You even talked about marrying the child. Are you married? No. You’re sick in the head for finding children attractive.

He's with a 15-year-old, someone should call the police. Oh, he works there? Yeah, he does. We have evidence of him having sex with a minor. Let's call the police. This is crazy.

The speakers engage in a conversation about various topics. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 about her husband's involvement in the MDD. Speaker 1 mentions their work in catching online child predators and their goal to increase the number of arrests and convictions. Speaker 0 expresses belief in their cause. Speaker 1 discusses a disturbing incident involving a pedophile in Wyoming. Speaker 0 admits to coming to meet an 11-year-old for sex. Speaker 1 confronts Speaker 0 about illegal content on his phone, including nude pictures of children. They discuss their methods of catching predators and turning evidence over to law enforcement. Speaker 0 admits to struggling with his fantasies. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 asking about vaccine injuries and Speaker 0 questioning the necessity of the conversation.

Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1 about planning to meet a 14-year-old boy for sex, revealing he has all the information and can report it. Speaker 1 admits wrongdoing and expresses feeling horrible. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's motivations, especially considering his position as a professor. Speaker 1 admits to bringing lube and a douche. Speaker 0 expresses disbelief and seeks understanding. Speaker 1 acknowledges he "fucked up" and may need help. Speaker 0 emphasizes the seriousness of the situation. Later, law enforcement arrives. Speaker 2 explains they cannot make an arrest because Speaker 0 isn't law enforcement. The phone will be taken as evidence, and the case will be referred to the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. Speaker 0 questions why the same evidence leads to arrests in Orange County but not San Diego County. Speaker 2 refuses to debate the issue. Speaker 0 suggests this will look bad.

The speaker confronts someone who came to meet what they believed to be a child. They inform the person that the police have been called and that they have been exposed by a group called Predator Exposure. The speaker questions the person about their intentions and how they arrived in the country. They also mention the inappropriate conversations the person had with the supposed child. The speaker emphasizes that the person will be arrested for their actions.

"you're under arrest currently, right, on suspicion of harassment." "the grounds of the arrest are that from the March 10, you've made apparently a number of posts online and on social media harassing an individual who came making serious allegations." "Someone from the church." "We've got serious safeguarding concerns." "But we need to interview you in relation to that investigation have been made." "My children are 12, 13, and eight." "First of all, there's three things that we need to do." "I've got three young children here on the property." "They don't I don't know where they are."

Hey Nick, can you come here? Let's talk privately, away from everyone. What do you do here during the day? Just hang out with friends? What are your hobbies? You play video games, huh? What kind of games? Wrestling? Who's your favorite wrestler? We're here because of your online posts. Facebook and TikTok blocked you, right? Unfortunately, you're coming with us. I know you don't want to go, but we have to take you to see a doctor. You can't keep doing what you were doing. I'm sorry, but it's necessary. Please, promise me you won't do it again. I want to believe you.

The video features a conversation between the speaker and a man named Si, who denies knowing a girl named Ariel and claims to have deleted his Instagram account. Si admits to inappropriate messages from the Ask Me 21 account but denies any knowledge of messages with Ariel. Si acknowledges his mistake and claims to have sent a penis picture found on the internet. The speaker emphasizes the importance of addressing the situation and clarifying Si's intentions. The speaker admits to being involved in online chats with explicit content but denies actively seeking out or engaging with underage individuals. He mentions encountering accounts that posted raunchy pictures of younger individuals but claims to have never engaged in inappropriate behavior offline. He expresses regret for his actions and acknowledges the seriousness of the situation. The conversation revolves around a man named Cy who admits to messaging a 13-year-old girl and watching child pornography involving girls as young as 10 years old. His partner, Brianna, expresses shock and concern, especially since they have a 6-year-old daughter. They discuss the need for Cy to seek help and potentially involve law enforcement to protect their child and ensure accountability. The speakers discuss a situation involving a man who engaged in inappropriate conversations with someone he believed to be a 13-year-old girl. They debate the consequences he should face and the effectiveness of counseling programs for sex offenders. They ultimately decide to involve the police and acknowledge the seriousness of the situation, mentioning a platform where viewers can support the predator catchers.

Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1 about planning to meet a 14-year-old for sex, revealing they have all the information. Speaker 1 admits fault, acknowledging they "fucked up" and expresses feeling horrible. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's intentions, highlighting the presence of lube and a douche in their bag. Speaker 0 struggles to understand why someone like Speaker 1, a professor, would engage in such behavior. Speaker 1 says they need help. Speaker 0 informs law enforcement about the situation. Law enforcement explains that because Speaker 0 isn't law enforcement, they can't use the evidence for probable cause for an arrest. Speaker 1's phone will be taken as evidence, and the case will be referred to the Internet crimes against children task force. Speaker 0 questions why the law enforcement cannot find probable cause when they can in Orange County. Law enforcement refuses to debate the issue.

I'm coming for you and your whole family. You called me a child rapist, and now it's on. I know you've been in Mexico, and I'm going to find you. Anyone who accuses me of that deserves to be punished. This conversation is recorded, and I’m serious about my threats. You want to play games? I’m offering $10,000 for your location. You think you can hide? Just send me the right info, and I’ll take care of the rest. You’re done.