The Paedophile Hunter Airing on Channel 4

Channel 4 are preparing to screen a sickening and disgusting documentary they are calling The Paedophile Hunter. The documentary follows around an extremely dangerous and predatory individual by the name of Stinson Hunter. This is a man who poses as teenage girls online in an attempt to entrap vulnerable young men. When they agree to meet up, he then reveals his true identity and reports the men to the police where they are then sent to meet a horrific fate in a sex offender gulag. His actions have resulted in at least one suicide. It should be noted that Stinson Hunter is not his real name; he changed it by deed poll from Keiren Parsons demonstrating his desire to keep up a menacing predatory persona. This is not merely promotional menace either as he has already spent 6 years in prison himself for violent offences. He is on all accounts a dangerous, violent thug.

Unsurprisingly in our totalitarian society I expect that the documentary will be largely supportive of Stinson Hunter. The documentary will inevitably try to pretend that it is ‘impartial’ and claim to be to some extent critical of Hunter’s extra judicial actions, however, it’s underlying direction will be that the ‘public’ (whoever they are) are ‘sick of paedophiles’. Hidden behind a veil of political correctness the documentary’s message will be clear: A final solution is needed for the ‘paedophile problem’.

As far right pro-death penalty parties like UKIP gain traction the consequences should be obvious. Modern day concentration camps will be built for the mass executions of alleged ‘paedophiles’.  As any sensible person knows of course, the ‘paedophile’ is synonymous with the male. It is entirely normal for men to be attracted to teenage girls and no male will safe as the paedophile inquisition moves towards full blown genocide.

Send your messages of hate and disapproval to Channel4. If you want to see this loathsome predator Stinson Hunter himself here is his video in which he celebrates the creation of his revolting documentary:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in News, Paedohysteria. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to The Paedophile Hunter Airing on Channel 4

  1. thedude says:

    Despicable animal. We can only hope one of his victims will turn around one day and bludgeon the fucker to death. It will have been well earned.

  2. mr p says:

    Its no surprise he got attacked,when you got a bunch of thugs running at you,your response is either flight or fight! he should have drove at him one more time,like an injured animal!
    again they’re wrongly using the paedophilia label for normal male sexuality,history tells us we’ve long been romantic or sexual with girls from around 12,that’s why in Muslim countries they make them wear a veil from around nine,a common time when puberty begin’s.

    just reading the tweets around that video highlights the attitude of the public,only today in the News
    they mentioned terrorism and “grooming” cases such as Rotherham are fueling far right gangs,so maybe you are onto something,of course I’m not going to judge all 1,400 cases concerning Rotherham,but i suspect many are just statutory rape (crimes against the state) but hopefully the
    more men’s rights movements realize this paedophilia label is predominantly an attack on normal
    male sexuality,the more will sympathize and the better we are at countering our aggressors!

  3. Jacob says:

    I don’t see why you hate this person. I have seen some of his work and I don’t get why you guys are calling it entrapment though. From what Stinson Hunter said is that they tell them their age (i.e. 14 etc) before they continue. Normal people would leave the conversation whereas paedophiles would carry the conversation.

    Regarding the suicide, how is Stinson involved. Stinson didn’t tell him to commit suicide. Michael parkes was the one who did it.

    In fact I have a friend who was caught by Stinson (They haven’t released the video) and even though my friend is my best friend, the way Stinson handles it, is completely non-entrapment. I have seen how Stinson works and I support him even though my friend got caught by him.

    • Jacob says:

      Also how come on your twitter, you want to abolish sexual grooming laws?

    • holocaust21 says:

      Well I’m speechless. The only word I can use to describe your post is ‘Orwellian’. You would go so far as to throw your ‘best’ friend under the bus in your attempt to uphold feminazi ideology? How on earth can you consider him your ‘best’ friend when you would happily sentence him to many decades of beatings in prison & on the sex offender registry? The inconsistency of your convictions is as puzzling as it is shocking. And to claim that Stinson did not drive Michael Parkes to suicide is obscene. If Stinson had not entrapped him then he would never have killed himself. That is almost certain. Thus, Stinson is to blame.

      Stinson is a monster precisely BECAUSE he tries to imprison men for pursuing their perfectly normal desires. The war on paedophiles is the war on normal male sexuality. There is nothing abnormal or wrong about men having relations with 14 year old girls. Neither the age of consent nor the ever broadening definition of ‘paedophilia’ is grounded in science – only dogma & bigotry. Every year the feminist movement strives to rise this age and increase the barbarity of the punishments for those having perfectly harmless and consensual encounters with underage girls.

      • Jacob says:

        “How on earth can you consider him your ‘best’ friend when you would happily sentence him to many decades of beatings in prison & on the sex offender registry?”

        Actually I caught him downloading children pictures a few years ago. I have known about his behaviour. I have offered to help him with the situation. I didn’t want him to get arrested or having procession of those images. Would you do the same, help your friend avoid jail?

        In the end he got caught by Stinson and I have been warning him to get help. It not’s my fault if he continued.

        “claim that Stinson did not drive Michael Parkes to suicide is obscene. If Stinson had not entrapped him then he would never have killed himself.”
        Stinson didn’t force Michael to commit suicide. Michael shouldn’t have met up with Stinson. The whole situation would have been avoided if Michael left the conversation.

        “There is nothing abnormal or wrong about men having relations with 14 year old girls.”
        Clearly shows which side you are on. I have got a 14 year-old daughter and I wouldn’t want some 40-year old man trying to chat her up for sex. If you think that is normal then clearly you need some help.

      • holocaust21 says:

        “Clearly shows which side you are on. I have got a 14 year-old daughter and I wouldn’t want some 40-year old man trying to chat her up for sex. If you think that is normal then clearly you need some help.”

        And yet you are unable to provide a single argument for why a consenting sexual relationship with a 14 year old is wrong. Your only argument is that I am mentally ill. Now let me show you the pro argument: Why Jeremy Forrest Was Right To Fall In Love With An Underage Girl

  4. Jacob says:

    “And yet you are unable to provide a single argument for why a consenting sexual relationship with a 14 year old is wrong. Your only argument is that I am mentally ill.”

    Tell me why you think a sexual relationship with a 14 year old is right, because I can tell you from first experience that is wrong;
    My sister (who is about 35 now) was in a relationship when she was 14. She was in a relationship with a 45 year old. The 45 year old abused her, physically and mentally. She is afraid of going out now because of the abuse she had from him. Guess what though, CPS didn’t punish him as there was not enough evidence. That’s why I don’t think having a relationship like that is right. To be honest a older person should be looking for people in his age rather than young people. Not to mention it affects the child later in life.

    Also I didn’t say you was mentally ill. I said you need help, as in you need help to see why having a 60 year old man having a relationship with a 14 year old girl is wrong.

    • holocaust21 says:

      Read the link I gave you. I explain there why it is right.

      Regarding your sister, there are two possible scenarios in that case, either:
      1) Her boyfriend was genuinely violent and abusive in the original English sense of the word. In which case what he did was illegal anyway so that does not justify the jailing – and far worse abuse – of men in consensual relationships.

      2) Your sister is a feminist and has adopted feminist ideology to the point where she views consenting relationships as abusive. She is happy to accuse any man of abuse if he doesn’t behave exactly how she wants and expects – rather than accept people are different and he is simply not right for her. Gynocentrism – where only the female view is heard and the male view is ignored – should have no place in society.

      As demonstrated in the Rind study (again, see the link I provided) many illegal underage relationships are viewed positively. Even for those viewed negatively there is no evidence of intense and pervasive harm. Indeed the evidence suggests that intense and pervasive harm is rare and that intensity of negative feelings is typically very low.

      There is infact evidence that on some occasions age of consent laws CAUSE intense and pervasive harm to the so-called “victim”. So your sister’s desire to see any man in a consensual relationship jailed creates another woman’s nightmare. See the following video of a female “victim” angered by age of consent laws. This was previously posted elsewhere on this blog by mr p:

      • Jacob says:

        “1) Her boyfriend was genuinely violent and abusive in the original English sense of the word. In which case what he did was illegal anyway so that does not justify the jailing – and far worse abuse – of men in consensual relationships.”

        The guy in question was violent towards my sister. If you had seen what I have seen what happened to my sister, then you can understand why I don’t those kind of relationships to happen.

        Regarding the link, I know that the girl wanted to be with the teacher, but you never know if the teacher would be abusive to her. Even if stats show that the chances of having the child abused is low, it is still a possibility that it can happen. Not to mention some victims don’t reveal the abuse to people for several years. My sister took 5 years to reveal the abuse that happened, and even then he was still abusing her.

        Personally for me, I don’t see a problem with people going out if they are adults (regardless of age) ). It is the fact that adults would take advantage over children to rape them, abuse them physically etc.

        By the way, thanks for taking the time out to have a chat.

      • holocaust21 says:

        “Regarding the link, I know that the girl wanted to be with the teacher, but you never know if the teacher would be abusive to her. Even if stats show that the chances of having the child abused is low, it is still a possibility that it can happen.”

        Then criminalise abusive acts ONLY thus freeing up police time to pursue abusers rather than consensual sex criminals. Furthermore you emphasize how important it is to stop any abuse no matter how improbable yet you seem more than happy to have 1 million men placed on the SOR & in prison in America and 50,000+ in Britain. These people live subhuman existences that are far worse than what your sister has endured for usually having done nothing wrong at all.

  5. Jacob says:

    “Furthermore you emphasize how important it is to stop any abuse no matter how improbable yet you seem more than happy to have 1 million men placed on the SOR & in prison in America and 50,000+ in Britain. These people live subhuman existences that are far worse than what your sister has endured for usually having done nothing wrong at all.”

    It is important to stop abuse regardless, but I don’t have problems with people that want to have a nice relationship. Its more of the abusive relationships that I want to stop. Not to mention that the media stirs these stuff up aswell. Honestly if there was no abuse at all across the world with these relationships then I think no one will question a 60 year old relationship with a 14 year old.
    Perhaps that why people want these type of relationships to stop because they fear of the possible abuse a child may face.

    “These people live subhuman existences that are far worse than what your sister has endured for usually having done nothing wrong at all.”
    I will agree that if a person who didn’t want to harm the child at all, then they shouldn’t be in prison. If they wanted to harm the child then I would want them to stay in prison.

    • holocaust21 says:

      “Perhaps that why people want these type of relationships to stop because they fear of the possible abuse a child may face.”

      This is a fear stirred up by feminists, politicians, law enforcement, child ‘protection’ charities, opportunists and the media. They are blatantly lying to increase their own power and with terrible consequences. I’ve detailed elsewhere on this site the way that the police physically assault children when kidnapping them from their parents and the way that police have committed violent sexual offences against children in order to convict them of a sex crime (yes, really, read that carefully!).

      “I will agree that if a person who didn’t want to harm the child at all, then they shouldn’t be in prison. If they wanted to harm the child then I would want them to stay in prison.”

      Then why do you condemn your friend and support Stinson Hunter? Stinson is simply an opportunist. He has a violent background which included assault and even arson against a school. Is that someone who you think has any respect for children or anyone else?

      • Jacob says:

        “I’ve detailed elsewhere on this site the way that the police physically assault children when kidnapping them from their parents and the way that police have committed violent sexual offences against children in order to convict them of a sex crime (yes, really, read that carefully!).”
        Yeah I noticed those posts and they are quite shocking.

        “Then why do you condemn your friend and support Stinson Hunter? Stinson is simply an opportunist. He has a violent background which included assault and even arson against a school. Is that someone who you think has any respect for children or anyone else?”

        Regarding my friend, he was boasting to me about harming a child (which at the time Police was notified by me about it, they didn’t want to arrest him until they were sure he was going to harm a child).
        With Stinson, I noticed a post shared online where he caught someone (whose name I can’t remember) and the video evidence shown the person welding a weapon. If the person was meeting an actual child, what would have happened.
        I have seen him comment on his past but all I know was he was 17 (or 16) and he committed arson to a school. I don’t remember him saying he committed assault. He has served his sentence and from his comments about the subject is that he served his time and was a twat at the time.
        I could relate to his arson as I had done a similar crime. I was a teenager
        and I did commit arson during the 1985 Brixton riots. Even though I was caught, I did my time and since then I have been guilty since that incident. I have been doing charity work since that incident to make up for my childish actions.

      • holocaust21 says:

        See here, Stinson was jailed first for arson then assault: http://www.tamworthinformed.co.uk/stinson-hunter-comes-clean-about-criminal-past/

        “Regarding my friend, he was boasting to me about harming a child”

        Define harm?

    • mr p says:

      The fact that these relationships are in secrecy is part of the problem,If there was a different scenario where these relationships were in the open,there’s less chance of abuse.this jakob seems obsessed with the ages of the partners,when its the quality of the
      relationship that counts,you may get an old fat 50yo with a warm heart that attracts some women and girls.

      • Jacob says:

        “this jakob seems obsessed with the ages of the partners,when its the quality of the
        relationship that counts,you may get an old fat 50yo with a warm heart that attracts some women and girls.”

        I’m not complaining about the age or anything. Its the fact that people will go to long lengths to harm (abusive or pyshical). If two people can prove that they won’t harm each other during a relationship, then I don’t have a problem.

        However each relationship I have seen, it has always been abuse involved. Not to mention I have a 14 year old daughter, and I don’t want her to fall in the same trap as my sister did.

        “The fact that these relationships are in secrecy is part of the problem,If there was a different scenario where these relationships were in the open,there’s less chance of abuse.”
        On top of what you said, the abuse does happen behind closed doors so no one knows about it until the victim comes forward.

  6. Alan Vaughn says:

    “Regarding my friend, he was boasting to me about harming a child”

    Define harm?

    Well Jacob…? We’re waiting…
    Guess he cannot really answer that one, knowing that whatever nonsense he offers, will almost certainly be treated as such…
    Just another dickhead paedocrite with something to hide, or rather: something he at least feels he needs to hide – i.e. his normal heterosexuality, which even though he cannot bring himself to admit it, (thanks to being terrified of our brain-washed, paedohysterical society’s views), includes finding teenaged girls attractive… (Teenage, post-pubescent and fully fertile girls, that feminists and the law they have complete control of, now define as ‘children’)…

    Yet the biggest paedocrite and DICKHEAD of them all is the one this post is all about… I’d bet a year’s salary he has a lot more to hide than merely burning down a school, assaulting a few individuals and a criminal record for similar trivial; offences…

    RIGHT STINSON?

    • Jacob says:

      “”“Regarding my friend, he was boasting to me about harming a child”

      Define harm?”

      Physical, like for example he was boasting about punching her, kicking her. Even mentioned about kidnapping her for ransom. Luckily the kid he was going to do was in fact Stinson.

      “Well Jacob…? We’re waiting…”
      Sorry to keep you waiting, I’m on here 24/7. I do have a life and a job to do.

      “Just another dickhead paedocrite with something to hide, or rather: something he at least feels he needs to hide”
      okay call me anything you want if it makes you happy, but I’m not a paedocrite. The only child I’m interested is keeping my child safe.

      ” assaulting a few individuals”
      Can you actually provide me an article that has Stinson has assaulted someone?

  7. Alan Vaughn says:

    Jezuz Jacob, you really are living up to your reputation (a complete dickhead) or maybe you just don’t (or cannot) read. I don’t need to provide you with any article that “that has Stinson has assaulted someone?”.
    I don’t have to as holocaust21 himself already did in the comment above that we are STILL waiting for you to reply to…
    This Comment:

    See here, Stinson was jailed first for arson then assault: http://www.tamworthinformed.co.uk/stinson-hunter-comes-clean-about-criminal-past/

    If you follow the link and actually READ what’s there, you will read, among other things about this disgusting ‘hero’, this:

    He served a short prison sentence for common assault six years ago.

    • Jacob says:

      “we are STILL waiting for you to reply to”
      I just replied to your comment with that reply as a quote. Not my fault that you are still waiting for me to reply, even though I have replied.

      Regarding the link holocaust provided, I can’t access that link hence why I’m asking for a link. However I should have said “a different link”. I do apologise as I was rushing to reply. If I try accessing that page it comes up with Virgin Media Web safe which prevents me from continuing. However I have managed to find a different page with the same information which a friend of mine has provided.

      I have only just seen the documentary and I was disgusted by his behaviour. I didn’t actually realise that he posts the videos before they are convicted. That documentary has changed my opinion on Stinson.

      Also I need to ask should you judge someone based on their past convictions?

      If you haven’t seen one of my posts, I have had a conviction of arson in 1985. In fact I have several more convictions but I have served my time. My Last conviction was about 2000. I was an arsehole from 1985 to 2000. The thing is, my ex-partner split up when I revealed my dark past to her, about a year ago. I have been clean since 2000. Was it right for her to judge me on my past?

  8. Alan Vaughn says:

    @Jacob,

    “we are STILL waiting for you to reply to”
    I just replied to your comment with that reply as a quote. Not my fault that you are still waiting for me to reply, even though I have replied

    Indeed you did and I admit, I too was also ‘rushing to reply’ – my mistake and I therefore apologize to you…

    As for he rest of what you’ve said, I too was no little angel – I had a somewhat ‘troubled youth’ myself, albeit a few years earlier (during the 1970’s, I’m a little older than you that’s all), but I could almost place a ‘ditto’ below your last paragraph and there’d be the chapter on my ‘growing years’…

    Also I need to ask should you judge someone based on their past convictions?

    No. Personally, I judge others based on how they treat me, simple as that really. I’m not interested in someone’s past – only what they do now and if they’re nice I like them.
    Lets’ face it, how many people would there be in the world today that can honestly say they haven’t done something that hurt another person in some way or other – something they (like you and me), deeply regretted?

    However Mr Parsons Hunter does more than merely judge people on their past: he judges them on what he says they are, based upon pure feminist baloney, junk-science bollocks: hysteria and dogma and their hatred of (fellow) men! That makes him even lower. He is effectively judging his allies (other men) on the hearsay of extremely biased man haters – feminists. The same women who would cheer with delight if he himself went to prison for years of arse rape for the ‘offence’ of being NORMAL.
    Despite what those witches have convinced most to believe to the contrary: It is normal for ALL men to like and be (sexually) attracted to teenaged girls – that doses NOT make them ‘paedos’, ‘perverts’ or ‘sexual predators’, especially when the teenaged ‘victim’ is a 100% willing / consenting partner in a relationship with a man (young or old) and more to the point: does not give that Paedocritical THUG the right to judge any other man…

    You might be old enough to remember the days Jacob when there were gangs of thugs that used to go around similarly hunting down what were then dubbed ‘queers’ (homosexual men) and beat them senseless, even fatally sometimes. It turns out that almost all of those ‘queer-bashers’ were blatant closet homosexuals themselves and their apparent hatred and persecution of ‘queers’ was nothing more than a (rather obvious) smokescreen to try and hide their own homosexuality from a then, very disapproving society. (It was therefore, something to be very ashamed of in those days and was also illegal until relatively recently). Similar to what so called ‘paedophilia’ and its related paedohysteria is today.

    Men like Keiren Parsons, aka Stinson Hunter are the same, except he isn’t hiding homosexuality, he is hiding what feminists have convinced him and most of society, is something that must be hidden, as nowadays it’s almost illegal (thanks to their lobbying and hysteria): his normal, healthy attraction to young (post pubescent) girls. Which his feminist indoctrinated mind, believes to be paedophilia. It isn’t and that’s what makes his behavior a thousand times more unforgivable and despicable. Apart from anything else: what other people do in their private lives is simply none of his business.

    Finally, I also have a 14 year old daughter (and a 4 year old). I certainly do not need the likes of Mr Stinson Cunter to protect either of them, simply because I do NOT believe the hype… There are NO ‘paedos’ or ‘predators’ behind every closed door; nor ‘dirty ol’ men’ lurking in the woods near schools and playgrounds, just waiting to strike at the earliest opportunity, as embittered, sexually jealous femi-hags have convinced the majority of society via their manipulated media whipping up hysteria, to believe. It’s total crap Jacob.
    Don’t worry, your kids are safe… And they don’t need any psychopathic paedocrites to look out for them – they are in fact the ones that you really would need to be wary of, (as they say – ‘where there’s smoke, there’s fire’)…
    But from what you’ve just said above, I don’t think you need me to tell you that anyway…

    • Jacob says:

      “Indeed you did and I admit, I too was also ‘rushing to reply’ – my mistake and I therefore apologize to you…”
      No problem, apology accepted. Easy mistake to happen.

      “No. Personally, I judge others based on how they treat me, simple as that really. I’m not interested in someone’s past – only what they do now and if they’re nice I like them.
      Lets’ face it, how many people would there be in the world today that can honestly say they haven’t done something that hurt another person in some way or other – something they (like you and me), deeply regretted?”
      I have seen people including employers judge me on my past convictions from 1985. I have regretted it a lot, even so I have been to the trouble of finding the people affected and just apologise to them and take them out to have a drink on me. I don’t think I can find one person who would do this, or even apologise.

      “You might be old enough to remember the days Jacob when there were gangs of thugs that used to go around similarly hunting down what were then dubbed ‘queers’ (homosexual men) and beat them senseless, even fatally sometimes.”
      I do remember a little bit but not a lot. Unfortunately I’m not good at remembering things like this.

      “Don’t worry, your kids are safe… And they don’t need any psychopathic paedocrites to look out for them – they are in fact the ones that you really would need to be wary of, (as they say – ‘where there’s smoke, there’s fire’)…
      But from what you’ve just said above, I don’t think you need me to tell you that anyway…”

      I know my children (14 year-old and two twins to come soon) are currently safe but I do worry sometimes that they might go into a relationship that would become abusive. As a parent, like yourself, you don’t want your children to be harmed. Considering my sister previous relationship, I don’t want them to go through what she went through.

      Also Alan, I have to say you and holocaust21 have changed my views on Hunter and the views that I had on this subject. If you both have plans to go up north, we would definitely need to get a drink or something etc.

  9. Alan Vaughn says:

    Also Alan, I have to say you and holocaust21 have changed my views on Hunter and the views that I had on this subject. If you both have plans to go up north, we would definitely need to get a drink or something etc.

    Thank you Jacob, it is very reassuring for us both to know that we have made someone see the truth about feminists and the effect their destructive hysteria (paedohysteria) and fear mongering is causing and the damage it’s doing to our society.
    In particular: how it has all but completely destroyed what it was once based upon: the family unit. We need more people to wake up to what’s really going on – to see the huge elephant in the room. Eventually they will not only question feminism and its TRUE agenda, they will also reject it outright and destroy the wicked ideology that it is. Men and women will once again form normal loving relationships based upon trust and respect rather than the present basis of distrust, FEAR and feminist induced HATE.

    • Alan Vaughn says:

      And Yes, we would certainly join you for a drink if we are ever in your part of the world – we’d have plenty to talk about.
      Take care young man – its a tough world out there, but once again you don’t need me to tell you that!
      😀

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s