Buyer wants smelly shoes ... For children

poet123

alykatz wrote: »

Theres no immediate harm persay but think if everyone started reporting every little thing no matter how irrelervent then eventually the system gets bogged down leaving less time for going after the real criminals,
I supposed you could liken it to the story of the boy that cried wolf.
The real report may slip through the cracks get overlooked because the system is so bogged down with irrelervant data.

I am not sure it is your call to say what is relevant and what is not. I think the police would say that they are best placed to decide that.

Errata

Perhaps it's time everyone did start reporting every little thing.

alykatz

poet123 wrote: »

I think the point is that a !!!!!phile can be dormant, getting their kicks from online, shoes etc, and then they step it up to rl. It is always in them, they just act on it or not up to a point.

But your muddling a perversion for shoes with an urge to hurt a child.
Please if you can show proof from a reputable source that shoe sniffing is one of the proven steps to commiting crimes upon children i would be eternally grateful.
But everything i have read on the subject says otherwise.
Yes they can be dormant/controlled but only up to a point as you rightly say, but they get theirr kicks as you say from pics of the child not inaminate objects.

alykatz

Errata wrote: »

Perhaps it's time everyone did start reporting every little thing.

In an ideal world you are right but alas we dont live in an ideal world.
Resources are very limited so surely better to concentrate on those reports they can act on, rsther than those they file in the bin.

poet123

alykatz wrote: »

But your muddling a perversion for shoes with an urge to hurt a child.
Please if you can show proof from a reputable source that shoe sniffing is one of the proven steps to commiting crimes upon children i would be eternally grateful.
But everything i have read on the subject says otherwise.
Yes they can be dormant/controlled but only up to a point as you rightly say, but they get theirr kicks as you say from pics of the child not inaminate objects.

I am not muddling anything. I am simply saying that a shoe fetish is one thing, but to specifically ask for a child's shoe and a "smelly" one at that, takes the fetish to another level, it adds a worrying dimension for me. Why not just a shoe? Why not a grown woman's shoe? Sorry, but I think this is a time for erring on the side of caution.

alykatz

poet123 wrote: »

I am not muddling anything. I am simply saying that a shoe fetish is one thing, but to specifically ask for a child's shoe and a "smelly" one at that, takes the fetish to another level, it adds a worrying dimension for me. Why not just a shoe? Why not a grown woman's shoe? Sorry, but I think this is a time for erring on the side of caution.

But as op said the buyer has been buying a wide range of shoes so not just childrens. So they had bought womens shoes. And smell is all part and parcel of it

Errata

alykatz wrote: »

In an ideal world you are right but alas we dont live in an ideal world.
Resources are very limited so surely better to concentrate on those reports they can act on, rsther than those they file in the bin.

You're suggesting the police chuck reports in the bin? I doubt police resources are that limited.

alykatz

Errata wrote: »

You're suggesting the police chuck reports in the bin? I doubt police resources are that limited.

Unfortuately these days they are that limited.

poet123

alykatz wrote: »

But as op said the buyer has been buying a wide range of shoes so not just childrens. So they had bought womens shoes. And smell is all part and parcel of it

Maybe he started with women's......

porto_bello

poet123 wrote: »

to specifically ask for a child's shoe and a "smelly" one at that, takes the fetish to another level, it adds a worrying dimension for me.

Absolutely! The request was child-specific.

Errata wrote: »

I think the buyer thought very carefully indeed about what they wanted.

I quite agree and I think they chose their introductory message very carefully too.

Errata wrote: »

Perhaps it's time everyone did start reporting every little thing.

That would certainly make the internet a better and safer place - particularly for children.

alykatz wrote: »

PERVERT not Pedophile

Clearly there are some who are both. And clearly you are in no position to offer an accurate diagnosis on the basis of the limited details on this thread.

My view, throughout this thread has been to pass all correspondence to the police and empower their knowledge, experience and professionalism to judge what action to take, if any.

You seem to have great issues with involving the police. No doubt there are lots of people who worked in the BBC and the Irish Catholic church in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, who bitterly regret not going to the police with information and suspicions they had. Their 'do nothing ' approach has seriously damaged, if not destroyed many lives.

poet123 wrote: »

And what harm is there in reporting it and letting the authorities decide if there is anything untoward going on?

Hear, hear! Why would anyone of sound mind be resistant to the idea? [Particularly when getting it wrong by doing nothing could have catastrophic consequences].