The town of Fargo, North Dakota is cracking down on men looking to buy sex on Grindr, Craigslist, and other online platforms.
42-year-old Daniel Durr is the CEO and president of Don’s Car Wash in Fargo, North Dakota. He was just slapped with a $450 fine and a one day jail sentence after finding himself ensnared in a sex sting operation.
Related: Georgia sheriff busted for cruising for sex in a park during police sting operation
According to local Fargo news station WDAY6:
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
The charges stemmed from an undercover sex sting called “Operation Guardian Angel,” which targeted men accused of going to local hotels looking to hire minors for sex. Area law enforcement officials placed ads on websites and mobile apps through which contact with men was made. The apps included Grindr and Whisper, and the websites included Craigslist.com and Backpage.com.
An undercover officer would pretend to be a minor then lure unsuspecting men to a hotel room, where they would be swiftly arrested.
It’s unclear whether Durr thought he was communicating with a male or female. But Durr’s attorney, Cash Aaland, maintains that as soon as his client learned he was communicating with a minor, he tried to get back in his car and drive away. Of course, by then it was too late. Police swooped in and arrested him.
Durr was found guilty of the Class B misdemeanor charge; however, he was found not guilty of a more serious felony charge of patronizing a minor for commercial sexual activity.
As a result of the whole kerfuffle, Aaland says Durr has suffered from “heavy public vilification,” including a public boycott of his business and a series of nasty online reviews.
Aaland also says Durr has begun seeing a counselor and “is working hard to make sure this never happens again.”
Related: Cop who once led sting operations targeting gay men busted for engaging in pervy behavior
crowebobby
Can you say: “Entrapment”?
ChrisK
I’m totally fine with kiddy fu*ckers being “Entrapped”. The only ones that have a problem with this are thinking of it themselves. He knew why and who he was going to meet. He got spooked by something and it wasn’t the kids age.
On a side note I miss the series “to catch a predictor”. Sweet tea will never be the same:)
Juanjo
It is not entrapment since the adverts were placed in general adverts. The people who respond to the advert have made the decision to do so. The question is do the adverts make it clear the person supposedly offering the services is a minor.
Also Chris K – I have a very specific issue with actual entrapment. The law applies to all people and does so fairly. If it does not then we are no longer able to refer to the Bill of Rights but merely to the Bill of Privileges Available to Some.
ChrisK
By this definition I was ok. I think you’re speaking of getting people to do what they wouldn’t ordinarily be doing and yes that is wrong.
Knight
Juanjo thanks for the “legal point of view” here. To your (and I believe Crowe’s) point, since we can’t see the ads it’s hard for us to assume the guy thought he was getting together with an underage kid or not. There’s a lot of ways it could have been written, such as “Teen seeking…” or “Younger looking for…” etc. The whole fetish of “barely legal” in the US really creeps me out, since by definition it is pushing the boundaries of what is legal…meaning it’s an easy jump to what isn’t.
jkb
You need to get out of Dodge, Durr. Sell biz and move. Ain’t nothing good for you there.
Kangol
Perhaps they already do this but I’m not on them so: most (or all?) gay dating/sex apps should probably list ages of consent for each state + country when people geotag where they are. So if you’re in ND, it pops right up–AGE OF CONSENT IS: 16 (or whatever it is). They could also write in code that automatically asks the question, when two people on the site start convo, Are you [AGE X], so it’s on the record, either way.
Sam6969
Kangol, you are right. More energy (and money) should be put on prevention than only punishment (and sex sting campaigns), so that people who are not real pedophiles have a chance to look away from those ads.
Sam6969
…from those ads or from individual minor profiles
GLF
grindr, for one, makes all parties “confirm” that they are over 18 to use the app…but how are they supposed to keep people from lying? I make a point to ask a few different ways if someone looks young, to see if they are *truly* of age. But you can’t put the onus on the platform. People will always lie, that’s the bad thing about people.
ChrisK
These men most definitely knew the people they were talking to were under age. It’s what attracted them in the first place. “An undercover officer would pretend to be a minor”.
If you can prove they lied to be on the Grindr platform you have a very good defense. The only ones I’ve seen convicted are those that acknowledge it through text messaging. Mike Dozer comes to mind.
mhoffman953
@Kangol
Why should the government force apps to add in costly code and implementations when people should already know the law?
Anytime they do uncover sting operations with a cop posing a child, they make it very clear to the child predator that the fake profile is an underage profile through repeated text messages. They do this to build a strong case. If the predator could prove that the undercover never said his age, then there wouldn’t be a case.
We shouldn’t be defending pedophiles or trying to get them “treatment”. They belong in prison or way worse
Kangol
You know, @mhoffmann, I try to be reasonable when it comes to you, but you really need help. At NO POINT did I say the “government” should require apps to do anything. Not once. In fact, as the other responders grasped, my suggestion was that the apps voluntarily do this if they didn’t, and someone pointed out how Grindr worked. YOU twisted my comment around to that. What is wrong with you? Can’t you read? Are you so hyperpartisan and politicized that you can’t even read a simple statement without transforming it through right-wing hysteria? WTF is wrong with you? Seriously, get some help, and fast.
mhoffman953
@Kangol
“At NO POINT did I say the ‘government’ should require apps to do anything. Not once.”
Well, you said, “most (or all?) gay dating/sex apps SHOULD probably list ages of consent for each state + country when people geotag where they are”
The definition of should is “used to indicate obligation” which is by definition “an act to which a person is legally bound”.
So, if you wanted to denote that the apps COULD voluntarily do this extraneous and redundant process of beating it’s users over the head with age of consent reminders with pop-ups and requirements before a conversation can start as per your suggestion, the word ‘could’ would’ve been more appropriate. Otherwise it comes across as you saying the apps SHOULD do your suggestion
Kangol
@mhoffman953, are you serious? You are the only one who misread my reasonable suggestion. In fact I even wrote “probably.” Not: the government should mandate XYZ. You, and only you, brought the anti-government crazy.
If I say you should read something more carefully, do you think anyone would interpret this to mean that the US government should force you by law or mandate or regulate you read more carefully? No. No one except a hyper-politicized person.
JoeyRamone
Oh, Miss Hoffman, you such a fool.
Daniel-Reader
Something doesn’t register right here? If they weren’t pretending to be an adult right up until the person came to the hotel, why would the guy attempt to leave at that point upon learning it wasn’t an adult? And since they didn’t charge him with anything dealing with a minor, they had to be pretending to be an adult up to that point, so cops were just targeting men in general for solicitation and then hoping they’d go with a minor afterward and when this guy didn’t go they couldn’t charge him with it. It doesn’t say they placed ads as minors. Only that a cop pretended to be a minor to attempt to lure them to a room at the hotel.
ChrisK
That’s an interesting take on it. Simply busting guys for prostitution and right before they get there trying to up the charge. It’s possible that’s why he bolted.
I remember on “to catch a predator” they did it by the book from the very get go. Before they even left they knew they were talking to a minor.
Notright
And this is news why? The guy was just trying to get some tail of craigslist. So why? Where’s the victim in the supposed crime? I don’t see one.
ChrisK
Prostitution and most definitely attempted sex with a minor is all they need.
phallictomato
Yeah the title in this article is a bit misleading – because I too was like, um, isn’t Grindr kind of THE PLACE for sex? And if someone got sentenced to jail for trying to get hanky panky from a sex app, then there’s a ton of guys on Grindr that would be locked up, lol – but upon reading the article, I realized it pointed out it was basically a sting operation for catching guys wanting to have sex with a minor/person under the legal age of sexual consent.
It’s a bit ambiguous as to what the advert said EXACTLY though – and that’s where we’re all a bit confused. If the younger person in question said ‘I’m not 18 yet’ (or whatever the age in that country for consensual sex is) or ‘I’m not of legal age to have sex yet, but I want to, is that ok?’ or something along those lines, and he still chose to go through with it, then the guy wanting to have sex with that younger person DEFINITELY knew what he was doing, and that it was wrong.
jkthsnk
All you aholes saying it’s mot emtrapment with only these barebone facts need to GTFU about law enforcement and sex. I suggest reading some Laura Kipnis. Idiots.
Alan down in Florida
Sounds just like the old NBC series of specials To Catch A Predator.