How does this psycho get away with it?

Child-tormenting psychopath Stinson Hunter keeps getting away with it.
Months have passed since the estimable Bernie Najarian posted evidence on BoyChat, extensively referenced, of Hunter’s sadistic online “griefing” of kids. But instead of being exposed in the media for the nauseating bully he is, Hunter continues to be feted as a star vigilante who takes down “paedophiles” through online stings leading to successful prosecutions for dubious “crimes”.
In the most recent case, a man with no previous convictions currently awaits sentence for the heinous offence of trying to date “a 14-year-old boy” (actually Hunter) who had been using Grindr. As described in a Daily Mail report of the case, Grindr is a “mobile dating application”. The emphasis is mine, and it is surely worth emphasising that no teenager using this popular app would be unaware of its purpose, which is described upfront on its website as being to find “local gay, bi and curious guys for dating or friends for free”. In other words it would be used by gay boys actively looking for gay people to meet. They would hardly be surprised to encounter adult guys online: this would very likely be an exciting prospect, exactly what they were hoping for.
Hunter’s method is for his vigilante gang to pose online as an underage boy or girl. Once anyone takes the bait, sending explicit messages or images to the minor, the gang lure their mark to a meeting. Their victim is then filmed with handheld cameras and mobile phones and told to explain himself. The messages and footage are handed to police, resulting in some ten convictions so far, following filmed confrontations with dozens of men.
These activities have not gone entirely without criticism, notably after 45-year-old Michael Parkes, filmed by Hunter, hanged himself last year after being questioned by police on suspicion of arranging to meet someone he thought was a 12-year-old girl for sex. This came after Parkes was confronted by Hunter, and footage of the encounter was uploaded to the internet.
Hunter was taxed on ITV’s The James O’Brien Show with causing this suicide. Said host O’Brien:
“A man is dead because of what you did.”
“No,” Hunter shot back, “a man is dead because of what he did.”
It won him a big round of applause from the studio audience.
His quick-fire self-assurance, buoyed by the knowledge that empathy is not exactly a fashionable buzz word when applied to sex offenders (it is urged upon them but not for them), is just one aspect of his striking talents.
These extend to a flair for self-promotion, revealed in two astute decisions. Firstly, he rebranded himself from mild-sounding Keiren Parsons to predatory Stinson Hunter; and then he self-financed what became a roaringly successful vigilante documentary, The Paedophile Hunter, screened on Channel 4 in 2014. It won the 33-year-old Hunter, and director Dan Reed, the Best Single Documentary category at the Royal Television Programme Awards. Hunter now has well over half a million Facebook followers and earlier this year scooped two BAFTAs.
Not bad for a heavily-tattooed former heroin addict with face furniture (a lip ring) who, if his Wikipedia entry is correct, was expelled from three different schools as a kid and ended up burning one of them down; and who, after being jailed for this arson offence, managed to make a mess of a fellow inmate’s face with a plastic knife he had sharpened.
Arguably there is much to admire in the fact that Hunter has managed to “turn his life around”, as the cliché has it, from such an unpromising start. His fans surely think so, at least: where heretics here might see a vicious destroyer of other people, they presumably see an unlikely sort of modern knight, courageously riding to the rescue of kids in danger.
If so, they are right about one thing. It takes balls to confront those who are bound to be angered by the accusations he makes. A couple of years ago Hunter suffered broken bones and was in hospital for a week when one of those he was confronting ran into him with his car. I say this not to sympathise (though I am so shit-soft I find it hard to wish harm on anyone at all) but, rather, to note that the old adage linking bullying to cowardice is just not true. True psychopaths, as I believe Hunter to be, are often as reckless over their own welfare as they are callous towards others.
It is one of several aspects of his behaviour which, when taken together, indicate that far from being admirably brave in the selfless defence of others he is instead a dangerous psycho: far from keeping kids from danger he has shown a taste and a talent – yet another talent of this perversely gifted man – for wilfully and skilfully (using demonically manipulative verbal tactics) causing them emotional distress for his own pleasure.
As noted above, Bernie Najarian has set out the evidence. He tells us that Hunter, last year, “actively pursued a hobby called ‘griefing,’ a kind of publicized internet pranking, where his favorite activity was to invade the digital fantasy worlds of young boys in the online game Minecraft, and set fire to their digital buildings.” After reading Najarian’s account I watched one of the videos to which he linked, which was just as he described, and just as appalling, and I saw plenty of other online evidence to indicate Hunter’s active involvement. It could all be faked but I doubt it. You can do what I did and make your own judgement.
This all began with a video by an acknowledged associate of Hunter, Michael Donald of Dunfermline, Scotland.  Donald is a dedicated internet trickster who styles himself KillerKarrit, with a YouTube channel sporting a carrot logo,  and Michael the Dug. Why does he do it? In the words of his own candid admission “because I’m a cunt”.
Friendly users of games such as Minecraft invite other members of the player community into their worlds to game with them.  They are hosts. It’s like inviting someone into your home: you don’t expect your guests to trash the place after you have painstakingly built it, a task that may have taken a lot of time and thought.  Thus the arrival of a gang of virtual thugs bent on destruction is bound to come as a grievous shock, packing an emotional wallop not that different to a street mugging where you get smacked around and robbed of your smart-phone.
But it seems there are no specific laws against the aptly-named “griefing”, so lots of “cunts” have taken to this appalling new hobby like ducks to water. Like other forms of trolling it is just out there, quite openly, an ugly but inevitable aspect of free online expression. The openness, indeed, is part of the “fun”: griefing involves recording the gleeful destruction and the victim’s shocked reactions, then posting the resulting videos online so lots of other “cunts” can have a good laugh and admire the thugs’ style.
So Stinson Hunter, the real life arsonist, has recently been getting his kicks by burning down kids’ virtual buildings online. There’s a striking behavioural echo there, for sure. It’s not the flames that matter though but the pain. As Najarian put it:

“A supposed protector of online children spends his spare time causing pain and suffering to online children by trashing their video game constructions. It’s sickening.”

There has been a development, though. Whereas last year Cunt Carrot and Stinson Cunter were posting evidence of their dastardly deeds with much the same misplaced pride as the Islamist terrorists flaunt their beheading videos, it now seems belatedly to have dawned on Hunter that trashing kids’ games would also trash his image as a child protector if it were to become more widely known. His child-tormenting videos on the KillerKarrit and Stinson Hunter Youtube channels have been withdrawn; and it seems Hunter was behind complaints that resulted in at least one copy being taken down after it was posted elsewhere.
But maybe he need not worry too much. As Bernie Najarian concluded in March, and he hasn’t been proved wrong since:

“In this rolling atmosphere of witch-hunt, it is very unlikely that the news that Stinson Hunter is part of a gang that regularly torments 12-year-old boys for fun will make any impact.   The matter has already been ignored for months.  The whole tenor of the nation now is to omit such inconveniences from consciousness and to crown the pedophile stalker with laurel wreaths.”

Quite so, Bernie! That’s the way of the world, sadly, and certainly the way of our cowardly, lying national media in the UK!

 

A DECENT NEW FILM BY DAVID KENNERLY
There’s a fantastic new film out today but I have a bit of a problem if I try to big it up too much. It’s the greatest thing you’ll ever see but I can’t say so on account of an embarrassing personal detail, namely that I have an – ahem, excuse me – starring role! So that’s why I am mentioning it only down-page rather than giving it top billing. On this occasion I am quite happy to play second fiddle even to Stinson Hunter!
The real star of A Decent Life: The Dissenting Narrative of Tom O’Carroll, is the director, David Kennerly, who has miraculously managed to turn the pig’s ear of my discarded interview last year for Testimony Films into the silk purse of a 11-part, all-singing, all-dancing (well, not by me!) epic, which is launched today and can be seen on YouTube. The segments are each just a few minutes long, hence easily viewed at separate sittings, while the complete work is a little over 68 minutes.
David, as those who have been around at Heretic TOC since the inception will know, has been a guest blogger here a couple of times, debuting in 2013 with a piece about his childhood in the American Midwest and returning last year to warn about the menacing advance of securocratic government.
He studied at film school and has been involved professionally in film production. I didn’t know this background, but when he was liaising with me to make A Decent Life (his title not mine, in case you’re wondering, and I like it) it became obvious to me he has the relevant skills.
David first went to work on the audio of the Testimony Films interview last year, producing Stitching Up Steve Humphries, Humphries being the guy who conducted an interview on behalf of Testimony, which, in the light of what happened later, appears to have been designed to stitch me up as the interviewee. In making his pitch to me, Humphries had come across as a very sympathetic figure, emphasising his background as a social historian, and his interest in hearing a diverse range of views on sexuality, including mine.
The interview was to be part of a documentary on paedophilia he was making for Channel 4 called The Paedophile New Door. When this was aired, however – without any footage from his interview with me – it became overwhelmingly clear his position had all along been fundamentally hostile to mine. It looks as though he ditched my contribution because he had failed to trick me into saying anything that would discredit me: his would-be stitch-up had unravelled.
What David did was to turn the tables on Humphries, stringing together the audio of all his questions but without giving a word of my responses. This cleverly exposed his stitch-up tactics for what they were.
In A Decent Life, by contrast, he has done the exact opposite. This time we hear not a peep from Humphries. Instead, he has given full rein to my responses without them being butchered to quote me out of context or otherwise discredit my contribution.
I like the result and I hope you will. If you agree A Decent Life is a good film, please Tweet about it or give it a plug wherever you can, online via the social media or elsewhere. Thanks!
 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
30 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cyril

Defending is not heroism,
all deeds are made by frightened men
that can provoke but are the least
able to conquer and defend.
Just cowards need a reason to
attack and call their victim blame.
For children’s sake any battue
puts butchers at the height of fame.

Omnipolitx

> ““A man is dead because of what you did.”
“No,” Hunter shot back, “a man is dead because of what he did.”
It won him a big round of applause from the studio audience.”
[CENSORED] Honestly, any person or group that even, no matter if ignorant or just very shallow, gives that a clap or a liking for it then they deserve… [CENSORED: Two cuts were needed as these passages contravened HTOC policy – Mod]. Honestly, I am just sick and tired of the bullshit we are facing & yet no change has arrived for pedophiles, I just want to see fuckers get what they deserve for fucking with pedophiles who don’t take an exact liking or permissive view for bullshit.

omnipolitics16

Damn, where to begin with these perverted justice replicas made up of pathetic dipshits?

omnipolitics16

I mean dipshetz, forgot to refrain from using vulgar language.

[…] occasion was the odious arsonist, child-tormentor and self-righteous anti-paedophile sting artist Stinson Hunter. He and Chris Wittwer, who runs the UK & Ireland database linked above, both helped orchestrate […]

A.

He does come across as a real psychopath, doesn’t he! I’ve recently been reading Sociopath World, an extensive blog run by a woman who is a self-described law-abiding sociopath. Interesting stuff.
Really looking forward to watching the film, and many thanks to David Kennerly for making it. I recently saw a Dutch movie from last year called Aanmodderfakker. It’s about an aimless, glum thirty-two-year-old man who, almost against his will, strikes up a relationship with a beautiful and highly competent sixteen-year-old female babysitter. It won three big Dutch awards. Well worth seeing if you can find it.

eqfoundation

The irony is in all the people who just don’t care…or who thought we were somehow dramatizing things, when we started pointing out the quality of character possessed by Stinson and his associates.
A few even suggested we were targeting Stinson, “just because he goes after pedophiles”…as if this were a simple, strategic attempt to shut him down, but nobody honestly cares about the fact he derives enjoyment out of tormenting young kids [perish the thought, a pedophile would ever care about the wellbeing of a kid!].
It’s like it got totally lost on them, that these are not even decent people…and that it matters, how they treat other human beings.
I think they are clearly benefiting from the anti-hero phenomena…where even if you are a total creep and aught to be locked away yourself…”well…you’re doing the dirty work that needs doing”…and other very loose rationalizations, as to why they need encouragement.
It is important to know what people like Stinson are doing, when they think nobody is watching…because those moments say everything about them, as a person.
There was yet another video out there of Stinson trashing a hotel room, for unexplained reasons…while his friend [looking on and filming] just laughed, like some obnoxious simpleton punk.
When he figured out that his “private hobby” was being exposed, Stinson really became focused on getting it all out of the public eye…censoring it on the internet.
If people see him for what he is…and realize he has not honestly changed…it will hurt him…and he knows this.
He is a fraud…who knows he is a fraud…who knows that we know he is a fraud…Yet he continues with the charade.

[…] For those who missed the background, you can catch up by reading my blog piece last month (beneath the main blog): A DECENT NEW FILM BY DAVID KENNERLY. […]

Dissident

As Nataliya adroitly noted, Parsons is the type of bully who looks for the easiest target he can find so that he can indulge in his hostile inclinations while looking like a hero in the eyes of others. It’s the equivalent of a sadistic murderer or serial killer enlisting in the Armed Forces so he can blast people to pieces who have been identified as “the enemy” so he can achieve adulation for it by the cheering masses rather than being reviled as the wolf in human clothing that he actually is.
In the previous decade over here in America, the media was filled with individuals like Parsons. There was Xavier Von Erck and Chris Hanson – the brains behind the once-popular, since-shamed “To Catch a Predator” segments on the NBC news show Dateline NBC (see this article: http://gawker.com/5789577/how-the-weirdos-behind-to-catch-a-predator-blew-12-million) – as two main examples, not to mention the very similar crew from groups popular at the same time, like Absolute Zero Tolerance. Erck, Hanson, and the Zero crew are so similar in behavior and methodology to Parsons that one cannot help but wonder if they all emerged from the same proverbial cookie-cutter… or if they may perhaps represent their own sub-category of sociopath.
Parsons is actually a late-comer to the party. Then again, since the U.K. media seems to be trying its best to push the pedo hysteria past the peak it appears to have reached in the U.S., it should be no surprise that versions of Von Erck and Hanson are still cropping up there in all their vile glory.

mr pedo-man

Excellent videos: And Tom, Love your slight brummie accent!

Lensman

I really enjoyed David Kennerly’s “A Decent Life” – the juxtaposition of images and texts with Tom’s interview is entertaining, provocative, informative and humourous (those grinning accordionists who fill-in during Tom’s thoughts on child erotica/pornography are particularly inspired).
One thing really leapt out at me is the use of the epithet ‘Loved-Boy’ (part 5 re Harry Hay) to describe someone who as a child has had positive sexual experiences with an adult.
Innocuous at first glance it becomes incendiary on reflection because it packs in so much meaning, and presents a prima facie idea that no-one could object to (the phrase ‘consenting humans’ has the same explosive power).
Is it new or is it a phrase already in use? I notice that it has quotation marks around it. I’ve never come across it before.
It strikes me as a label that could provide a positive alternative to ‘abuse survivor’, which is the sole option currently available.
If I squint my eyes against Reality’s glare I can almost imagine people using it on their facebook profiles…

Christian

The expression “loved boy” was already used before, see for instance David Riegel’s Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers (2000/2009) http://www.shfri.net/shfp/ulbabl/ulbabl.html

Dave Riegel

Actually the term “loved boy” has been around as long as I can remember. In fact, without going off into Greek, I don’t know of any other word/phrase which in an objective and non-pejorative manner identifies the younger partner of a Boy-Attracted Pedosexual Male (BPM) in a consensual Sexually Expressed Boyhood Relationship with an Older Male (SEBROM).

David Kennerly

Thank you, Lensman! It means a great deal to me.
The segment about child pornography was genuinely challenging as I realized that, not only could I NOT use actual “child sexual abuse images” (as it has been re-christened by the fascists) but it would be highly problematic to use any kind of images of kids, no matter how “innocent” and seemingly inoffensive, real or virtual, given the extent of the hysterical distortions which surround children and their depiction today, especially when the one doing the depicting is someone like me.
So, I decided to make that piece accurately reflect the radically pared-down liberties which are reality today. I genuinely believe that this response was not a case of exaggerating for effect but of sincerely expressing frustration with what can be safely expressed in the U.S. and the United Kingdom. Of course, much of that frustration is as a result of not really KNOWING how speech can now be construed and realizing that today’s extraordinarily broad legal proscriptions serve state opportunities for selective enforcement against their most hated minority (and I’m not talking about Islamicists).
I hoped to convey the very real parallels with what I saw as necessary self-censorship to the creative ways in which censorship is sometimes humorously skirted in (other) totalitarian police states.
Regarding “loved boy”: Harry himself had used the term, including in the few (although very long) conversations I had had with him (back in the mid-to-late ’80s). NAMBLA also used the term, although I don’t know when it first appeared in its publications.

Dissident

Great kudos to both you and Tom for the video, David! It was moving and made all of its points very clear without resorting to anything resembling ad hominem attacks on anyone. You brought out the best in Tom, and the imagery and clips you used were also excellent and symbolically apropos. When you began showing named pics of some of the worst offenders of the pedo hysteria, I thought to myself, “He better not leave out Oprah!” And sure enough, within two seconds of my thinking that, her smug mug did indeed appear on screen, right with the rest of the unsavory lot where it belonged.
The pics and details of children murdered by their parents that appeared at the end was very appropriately chilling as a counterpoint to a system that insists kids are at their safest when in the care of close family members (I was simultaneously enraged and shedding tears as these uncomfortable facts appeared before me), while simultaneously insisting that the greatest threats to their safety (outside of perhaps automobile-related incidents) are external to the family unit. Of course, many parents are not like that, and the institution of parenthood is not something we want to disparage out of hand; but the conditions under which kids are legally made the de facto property of their parents, isolated from the larger community in the nuclear family unit (recently discussed here via guest post by Lensman), and subject to the mercy of their two main adult “guardians” no matter what type of people they are, makes for a heavy indictment of a system whose rules allow this situation to continue while demonizing MAPs.
I find it particularly chilling and enlightening when I saw how many of those parental murderers were women. This flies in the face of an all-too-common belief among liberals in particular that men are inherently far more prone to violence when in positions of power over others. No doubt men commit such crimes much more often, but likely because they have traditionally been left with authority and power in such situations. This is interesting when you consider how inherently anti-male the AoC laws are when boiled down to their essence.

David Kennerly

Thank you Dissident, both for your kind remarks and for your very astute comments. Sorry I did not respond earlier as I did not see your post until now.
Yes, Oprah was a definite must as an inclusion in the recital of (some of) our enemies. Her villainy is surely off the charts. She has contributed more to the re-engineering of society than any other single person, I think.
The children murdered by their parents was quite wrenching for me to slog through. It was extremely distressing and I can’t tell you what a relief it was to finish that segment.
As far as mothers who murder their kids, they are more-or-less on a par with fathers. Mother’s boyfriends are especially villainous, often with the complicity of the mother. Depending on whose statistics you scrutinize, mothers and fathers take turns being more likely to kill their kids than the other.
I believe that, at the core of our struggle, must be the primacy of children and adolescents’ liberty.

Lensman

I’ve never watched (or participated in) Stitson’s program – but from what I can tell all his fictional children assume ages that are ‘post-pubescent’. And as such I think that, in a sense, he’s just picking on ‘norms’ who haven’t effectively repressed their attraction for individuals at lower end of the teleiophilic range.
I have several straight friends who, in confidence, have admitted to having felt interest and attraction to certain early-pubescent girls. Usually these feelings occur as the result of a particular encounter or interaction. Their attraction is not ‘generalised’ into a taste or a predisposition (or at least as far as I can tell), maybe because the stigma is such that any glimmer of such an attraction is quickly suppressed.
I have some experience of being involved in a site which has support and advice to MAPs as one of its main raisons d’être. It’s only an impression, but it seems to me that the hebephiles who come to us are often confused and distressed in a way that paedophiles ‘proper’ are not. I suspect that when you find out you’re a paedophile (in the strictest sense of the word) you have to come to terms with hard-edged, well-defined facts: your desires are not approved of by society, nor does the culture promote them.
The battle-lines are less clearly and unambiguously drawn for hebephiles, for whilst the society condemns an attraction to adolescents, we live in a culture that actively promotes it. The ideal ‘look’ and physique for fashion models and the pop industry is that of young teen girls, pubic hair is promoted as a turn-off, papers like the Daily Mail have their ‘side-bar’ of shame betraying a pre-occupation with girls being ‘all grown up’…
So hebephiles have their desire and love condemned and confused with paedophilia, whilst at the same time their culture consistently promotes that desire, plus every heterosexual man, if they’re honest, kind of knows that attraction to, or at least curiosity about, young pubescent girls is pretty much universal and ‘normal’ by most criteria.
Keiren Parsons is very much like recruits to daesh. They’re frequently criminals who’ve probably spent hours ‘watching’ violent videos and porn but found that experiencing these things via a screen is not quite enough – so they latch themselves onto an ideology that will allow them to actually do in real life those things they’ve spent hours fantasising about.
The added bonus for both Parsons and the islamo-fascists is that they plug into a system of ideas which actually praises them and rewards them for actions that would otherwise be seen as evil.
With Parsons – he’s a violent, brutish bully who has always been punished and condemned for being so. But now he’s found a way to be violent, brutish and bullying and be praised for it.
That unpleasant video showing his online bullying of children shows that the welfare of children has never been his concern.
And he probably gets to salve his vestigial conscience, and put up a (not very convincing) front for those intense, secret desires that I don’t doubt he nurtures in the deeps of whatever’s left of his mind.
How about a TV program called ‘The Hunter Hunted’? A self-styled paedo-hunter masquerading as a 15 year old girl is, over a period of months, lured into accepting large amounts of gifts and money from the (alleged) paedophile – who turns out to be PC Copper of the Yard, who prosecutes said paedo-hunter for the ‘use of a false identity for illicit financial gain’ – all with tv friendly encounter with the ‘Hunter’ and his thugs being surprised when, instead of expected paedo turning up to the meeting, a van-full of coppers piles in.
I’d pay good money to see that.

Phil

Bullying psychopath is exactly right, or ‘nauseating bully’ was it (let’s not split hairs)? He gets away with it from a support point of view by being a catalyst to focus the gullible masses on the perceived public enemy. He gets away with it legally because he embarrasses the police, who would rather let a psycho roam free than be accused of not doing enough to catch paedophiles (even though the guys he ‘hunts’ mostly appear to be ephebephiles). It’s the school playground all over again, targeting the poor saps who seem ‘fun’ to bully – because they’re different. I’d bet my house he was not one of those people at school who stuck up for the weak and vulnerable – the thing he pretends he is doing now – but exactly the opposite. He’s basically a coward, and not very ethical, which is the problem with all bullies. Seeking a feeling of superiority. People are drawn to him like flies to shit, because he prompts them to stand on their own dunghills and crow. He needs stepping on every bit as much as the Jihadi John’s of this world, they’re as pathetic and poisonous specimens of humanity as each other.

Christian

The description of Hunter in the BoyChat article fits that of the fascist mind in Wilhelm Reich’s The mass psychology of fascism.
A more “respectable” form of vigilantism is to report art sites as “child porn”. There was recently such an affair on Pigtails in Paint, see the silly comment by the vigilante (and the answers below by 2 readers then by the editor):
https://www.pigtailsinpaint.com/legals/#comment-26917
Then read the rebuttal by the other editor:
https://www.pigtailsinpaint.com/2015/06/addressing-a-commenter/
PS. Tom: no need to tell us Natalya’s/Emma’s WP site, one gets it by clicking on her name (as with any logged in WP user).

Dissident

And Emma the Emo is a totally cute name for a blog LOL! Just had to say that. Oh, and I’m also wondering why this comments section has become so quiet lately… this prompted me to post something.

David Kennerly

Tom, it’s a great topic and I’m glad you introduced it with such a fine piece.
Paucity of comments? Maybe you, and those who did comment, simply said all that needs saying.

Nataliya Kochergova

Haha, sounds like a sadist who found the perfect way to torture people and make others kill themselves the socially acceptable way. Looked at his site. The men he is taking screenshots of are not even pedophiles.

30
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top