baps
Would you want this guy living in your house, in close proximity to your children, after finding out these charges and the circumstances of his arrest?
That's a mistake for the prosecution to contend with in correctly making their case before the court, but it doesn't stop everyone else from casting their own judgement.
I can't think of any other plausible explanation of why he was arrested with $500 in his hand at a specific place that had been prearranged over email, phone calls and texts, other than to commit the rape of a 12-year-old girl, for that price, that had been discussed with the undercover officers - can you?
But who knows, maybe he'll return to the thread and explain what he thought he was doing when arrested in that police sting and what all those emails, texts and phone calls he exchanged with undercover investigators were about, if not that.
"When one looks at the evidence in this case, no reasonable person could conclude that the defendant did not send e-mails, text messages, and have the phone conversations regarding having sex with a 12-year-old girl."
The articles I linked above state that it was a sting operation. The perpetrator thought he was paying $500 to the uncle of a 12-year-old girl (who was apparently still slightly too old for his liking) so that he could rape her, but really this was a scenario set up by the police to gather evidence, with the goal of preventing future harm to an actual child.
https://www.cookcountysheriff.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02...
And this article also states that you were charged with soliciting a girl for sex and possessing child pornography:
https://www.shawlocal.com/2019/09/04/inmate-sues-because-he-...
"Bocock was arrested and jailed June 10, 2013, after he went to a Dunkin’ Donuts in Plainfield to meet with a 12-year-old girl for sex, according to court records."
And this article too:
https://patch.com/illinois/plainfield/brit-charged-child-sex...
"In exchange for the money, Bocock wanted a girl for sex, officials said, and preferred one between the ages of 7 and 11. [...] After Bocock was taken into custody, police searched his North Tripp Avenue home and found 'numerous' images of child pornography, a prosecutor said at a prior court hearing."
Also this one:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141106115016/http://patch.com/...
"Bocock allegedly responded to a Craigslist advertisement posted by a Plainfield resident trying to get money for his car payment. But in exchange for the money, Bocock wanted a girl for sex, officials said.
"The Plainfield resident went to the police and an investigator pretending to be the cash-strapped Craigslist poster continued the online conversation with Bocock, officials said. The investigator reportedly offered Bocock his 12-year-old niece for the car payment money, and a rendezvous was set up for Monday afternoon at a Dunkin' Donuts on Route 59."
And that you are currently on the Illinois child sex offender registry for this:
https://isp.illinois.gov/Sor/Details/X23A0424
What do you have to say about that?