Alberta boy escapes alleged abductor's car in 'catch a predator scheme' police call 'amazingly dangerous'
The boy was allegedly abducted on Monday evening after getting into the suspect's vehicle in the Coopers Crossing neighbourhood of Airdrie, just north of Calgary.
Police said he and a group of at least six other children in the same age range, possibly as many as 10 in total, started a conversation with the suspect and arranged to meet him via Snapchat, without the knowledge of any parents, in an attempt to expose the man as a child predator.
"Unfortunately, it didn't go as planned," said RCMP Cpl. Gina Slaney.
The 12-year-old boy voluntarily entered the suspect's vehicle so the other youth could record the interaction on video, police said, and the suspect then drove away. The boy later escaped from the vehicle while it was stopped at a red light and called 911.
The suspect fled in the vehicle, southbound on Highway 2 toward Calgary. With help from a Calgary police helicopter, he was later located at a home in the city's northeast.
Suspect has 'history with police'
Airdrie RCMP have now charged a 37-year-old Calgary man, who cannot be named due to a publication ban, with numerous offences including abduction of a person under the age of 14, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, kidnapping and forcible confinement, and three counts of breaching a prohibition order.
Cpl. Christopher Hrynyk with the Airdrie RCMP's specialized investigation unit said the suspect has "a history with police" and the breach charges relate to "previous investigations which did encapsulate minors being involved."
"We've had more than one investigation and file with this offender," added Staff Sgt. Mark Auger with the Alberta Law Enforcement Response Team's internet child exploitation unit.
Social media trend 'dangerous,' police say
Auger said the children's attempt at vigilante justice is part of a "growing trend" on social media that began in the United States and has migrated to Canada.
"In my opinion, this all came from the television program To Catch a Predator," he said.
Auger said the difference between that long-running American reality show and what people have been doing on social media is that the show involved police officers from the get-go, whereas the social media versions are typically amateur operations that put people at significant risk of harm.
"A lot of these setups and these stings will end in violence, in suicide, in sexual assault," he said.
The evidence gathered by vigilantes "ad-libbing" their way through online conversations with potential predators also presents "horrendous" challenges for actually prosecuting any alleged crimes, Auger said.
"A lot of that will be what we consider tainted evidence because we don't how the script went, how the conversation went. Was it entrapment? Who started the conversation down that road?"
Police also urged parents to have conversations with their kids about online behaviour like this.
"It's amazingly dangerous what happened with this incident," Auger said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump admin pausing issuance of visas for foreign truck drivers, Rubio says
President Trump's administration is pausing all issuance of worker visas for foreign truck drivers, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Thursday, arguing the growing number of international, commercial operators is putting the lives of Americans in danger. 'Effective immediately we are pausing all issuance of worker visas for commercial truck drivers. The increasing number of foreign drivers operating large tractor-trailer trucks on U.S. roads is endangering American lives and undercutting the livelihoods of American truckers,' Rubio said in a Thursday post on social platform X. Rubio's announcement comes days after Harjinder Singh, a truck driver, was accused of making an illegal U-turn that killed people around 50 miles north of West Palm Beach. The Department of Homeland Security said this week that Singh, who was arrested for three counts of vehicular homicide, was in the U.S. illegally. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy said on Tuesday that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration launched an investigation into the deadly Florida highway crash. Trump penned an executive order in late April requiring all commercial truck drivers operating in the U.S. to be proficient in English. The president designated English as the country's official language in an executive order in March. 'They should be able to read and understand traffic signs, communicate with traffic safety, border patrol, agricultural checkpoints, and cargo weight-limit station officers,' the White House said in the order at the time. 'Drivers need to provide feedback to their employers and customers and receive related directions in English.' Foreign truckers in the U.S. are usually working on H-2B visas. On Thursday, the State Department confirmed that it is vetting over 55 million U.S. visa holders for possible deportable infractions, including criminal activity, visa overstays and engagement in any form of terrorist activity.' The State Department said last week that it would pause all visas for visitors from the Gaza Strip as it conducts a 'full and thorough review of the process and procedures used to issue a small number of temporary medical-humanitarian visas in recent days.'
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Divided court eliminates Trump's half-billion-dollar fine in fraud case
While the court effectively upheld the fraud judgment against the president, several of the justices raised major questions about the case, which was decided by a state trial judge last year. A primary goal of their decision was to allow Trump to move to New York's highest court, giving him another opportunity to challenge the finding that he was a fraudster. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Despite the complexities, Thursday's ruling handed Trump a financial victory and a measure of legal validation. It represented a setback for New York's attorney general, Letitia James, who is one of the president's foremost adversaries and a target of his wide-ranging retribution campaign. The case had been a career-defining victory after she campaigned promising to bring Trump to justice. Advertisement Trump responded on social media Thursday, declaring victory and praising the court for having 'the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision.' He added that the case had been 'a Political Witch Hunt, in a business sense.' Advertisement Trump's company, the Trump Organization, released a statement saying the case was brought out of political malice for the president and that the ruling 'unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.' Still, the decision fell short of a full vindication. In denying Trump's bid to throw out the case, the court kept in place the ruling that he had committed fraud, an ignominious distinction for a sitting American president. James, in a statement, said that the court had 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud.' James, who pledged to appeal, filed the case against Trump and his family real estate business in 2022, accusing them of inflating his net worth to obtain favorable loan terms. After a months-long trial, the judge overseeing the case ruled last year that Trump was liable for conspiring to commit fraud, denting the mogul image that had enabled his political rise. Thursday's ruling came almost a year after the five judges, from the Appellate Division for the 1st Department, heard oral arguments, a delay that reflected the legal and political complexities of a case against a sitting president. Ultimately, the case was so divisive that the judges failed to form a true majority. Moulton's opinion upholding the case and wiping out the financial penalties received one additional vote, from the presiding justice, Dianne Renwick. Another judge, David Friedman, who has been skeptical of the accusations for years, wanted to throw the case out entirely, believing James had lacked the power to bring it. Two other judges, John Higgitt and Llinet Rosado, concluded that James had the authority to file the case, but wanted to provide Trump a new trial. Arguing that 'a remarkable situation has necessitated a remarkable solution,' they agreed to let the fraud judgment stand so that the case could move to a higher appeals court. They wrote that they did so 'after much consideration, with great reluctance.' Advertisement The four justices who formed the reluctant majority were appointed by Democratic governors. Friedman was appointed by Governor George Pataki, a Republican. In his own lengthy opinion, Friedman pointed out that he and two other judges — a majority — had believed that the judgment against Trump should be thrown out. But the trio could not agree on an effective remedy, allowing the judgment to stand for now. Friedman also blasted James for comments she made while running for office in 2018. She had pledged to investigate Trump, calling his presidency 'illegitimate' and saying she would join with other attorneys general in seeking to remove him from the White House. Even the judges more sympathetic to the attorney general's case agreed that criticism was merited, though they noted that they had already considered Trump's claims of political persecution and rejected them. In the appeal, Trump's lawyers argued that the roughly $450 million judgment — which before Thursday's ruling sat at more than $520 million with interest — was excessive, given that his lenders never lost money, and that the attorney general's office was meddling in private transactions. In Thursday's decision, Moulton agreed that the punishment outstripped the wrongdoing. He concluded that it was 'an excessive fine' barred under the Constitution. He rejected a new trial, however, saying that it is 'difficult to imagine that a trial could proceed while one of the principal defendants, and a central witness, is President of the United States.' Advertisement Moulton also wrote that the evidence clearly demonstrated liability, highlighting volumes of evidence against Trump, his two sons who run the family business and some of the company's top executives. The ruling maintained the result of a case that put Trump's fantastical claims of wealth on trial. But the judges' various disagreements reinforced the importance of any future decision in New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals. When the state judge, Arthur F. Engoron, imposed the half-billion-dollar judgment in February of last year, the eye-popping sum appeared to represent an existential threat to the Trump Organization. Trump's company struggled for weeks to line up a bond that would allow him to appeal the judgment without paying the state. When Trump came up short, the attorney general's office appeared poised to freeze some of Trump's bank accounts, until the appeals court allowed him to post a smaller bond. The court also did not force Trump to pay the penalty while he appealed the case. Much has changed since then, when Trump was still facing criminal indictments as he tried to reclaim the White House. Not only did he win reelection — a victory that effectively eliminated his criminal cases — but he also has recently reaped a windfall from his personal business ventures. His foray into cryptocurrency has been particularly profitable, adding billions of dollars in paper value to his net worth and removing any real threat to his financial stability. The civil fraud trial stemming from James's lawsuit was not decided by a jury. Instead, the power belonged to Engoron, who found after months of testimony that Trump had lied to lenders about the value of his properties. The judge sought to claw back Trump's ill-gotten profits and interest savings. Advertisement The judge also delivered a sweeping array of punishments, including barring Trump for three years from serving in top roles at any New York company, including portions of his own Trump Organization. He banned Trump's adult sons for two years. The appeals court, while eliminating the financial penalties, gave those other punishments the green light. This article originally appeared in
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
D.C. Families Brace For Start of School Under Trump Takeover
On a recent summer night, a 9-year-old girl in Northwest Washington, D.C. was having trouble sleeping. She heard on the news that speaking Spanish could draw the attention of federal agents, and she worried aloud to her Hispanic father that immigration officers might come for her classmates' parents. 'She kept asking, 'Can they come to people's homes? Can they come to our home?'' her father said. 'She was terrified.' Their family, longtime residents of the city and American citizens, are not at risk of deportation. But the girl's anxiety reflects a broader unease rippling through D.C. families as the city's public schools prepare to start a new school year on Monday, Aug. 25, under the shadow of President Donald Trump's takeover of the city's police force and a ramp up in federal immigration enforcement. Across the nation's capital, parents are setting up group chats on WhatsApp and Signal to coordinate carpools and walking groups. Some are pressing the city to relax attendance requirements, out of concern that some families might feel they have to keep their kids at home. 'We've got people volunteering to carpool other people's kids to school because the parents are afraid to try to get their kid to school on their own,' says Catherine Morgan, a D.C. resident whose child starts third grade on Monday. Since announcing in August that he would place the Metropolitan Police Department under federal control and deploy National Guard troops to patrol the streets, Trump has insisted his measures are necessary to curb what he has described as 'roving mobs of wild youth' and 'bloodthirsty criminals,' despite statistics showing violent crime in the city had hit a 30-year low earlier this year. His administration has also rolled back protections that once limited immigration enforcement around schools, allowing agents to conduct raids in neighborhoods and workplaces. The result, according to parents, educators and community leaders, is a climate of fear and confusion at the very moment when families are usually focused on first-day jitters, backpacks, and back-to-school clothes. Parents across the city interviewed for this story described adjusting their routines to shield their children from encounters with federal law enforcement whose mandate remains unclear. Marta Urquilla, a D.C. resident and mother of two teenagers, says she will not let her kids ride public buses to school. 'At this point, that's off the table,' she says. 'My kids present as Black, and that's just not something I am inclined to expose them to.' She says families in her neighborhood near Howard University have organized walking groups to the grocery store and that similar plans would be in place for school commutes. The federal occupation, Urquilla adds, has not been evenly felt across the city. 'The closer you get to where immigrants live, to where Black folks live and work, the more you see it,' she says. Rumors of ICE enforcement actions have swirled since Trump's inauguration in January, but have intensified over the past two weeks as ICE, FBI, Border Patrol, National Guard troops, and more have descended on D.C. streets. Videos have circulated of federal agents and local police arresting individuals in handcuffs and stopping others at various checkpoints. Across the country, school districts have been taking precautions to shield children from immigration enforcement. In New York, officials unanimously passed a resolution this year that prohibits ICE agents from entering schools or accessing student records without a judicial warrant. In Los Angeles, school leaders announced new 'safe zones' in areas targeted by ICE to protect students before and after school. D.C. parents, however, remain uncertain how much protection their schools can offer, given the city's lack of statehood and Trump's direct authority over its institutions. At a virtual information session for parents on Wednesday night, D.C. Public Schools officials attempted to address concerns about the increased law enforcement presence in the city, noting that they expect very little impact to schools. "Any law enforcement action on school grounds can only take place with a valid warrant or court order,' said Dr. Lewis D. Ferebee, the chancellor for District of Columbia Public Schools. He stressed that school resource officers are not performing any duties related to immigration or custom enforcement. DCPS also shared a few 'best practices' for parents to share with students, including to always travel in a group or with trusted adults, and to avoid distractions while traveling, such as being on a phone or using headphones. 'Please advise our young people to stay aware of their surroundings,' Ferebee said at the information session. D.C. police are currently enforcing a citywide juvenile curfew that begins at 11 p.m. for people under 17. In some targeted neighborhoods, juvenile curfews begin as early as 8 p.m. But some parents remain frustrated by the lack of communication from their schools about what many view as an unprecedented moment. 'We haven't been told a goddamn thing,' says Morgan when asked what her daughter's school in D.C. had communicated about the coming week. 'It makes us feel like, what are you going to do? Are you just going to let them come in and take these kids?' Jenn Kauffman is a mother of two who sits on the city's advisory neighborhood commission representing her neighborhood in Brightwood Park. She says parents are demanding stronger assurances from school leaders. 'I want bare minimum for the schools to kind of stand up and say what they will do to protect students,' she said. 'But in this climate, and you know, D.C. being a federal jurisdiction, I'm also afraid that still won't be enough.' Her 7-year-old, who attends a bilingual school, has already been discussing the situation with classmates. 'The kids have been talking about this and aware about this,' she says. 'But I think it's risen to a new level.' Parents say their children are absorbing the stress—and so are they. Lara Fife, whose 4-year-old started pre-K this month, says he has asked her why police are detaining people. 'I've been extremely stressed and not sleeping well at all,' she says. The White House insists the deployments are making Washington, D.C. safer, but most residents don't see it that way. A Washington Post-Schar School poll published Wednesday found roughly 80% of D.C. residents opposed Trump's executive order to federalize the city's police department, and 65% do not think Trump's actions will make the city safer. Residents warn that the show of force may deepen mistrust and drive children away from school. In Los Angeles, officials recently reported a 7% rise in online academy enrollment, attributing the spike in part to immigration fears. D.C. parents worry they may soon face the same difficult choice. 'Are we at a point where we need a virtual schooling option?' Kauffman asks. 'Because what's going to happen then is families are going to have to choose between risking their child, or being referred to Child Protective Services for truancy. And that's just immoral.' For now, families are bracing for Monday. Some will walk in groups. Others will drive in carpools. Still others may keep their children home. But the sense of unease remains. The Hispanic father with the worried 9-year-old daughter says his family plans to arrive at school extra early on Monday so he can warn other families if they notice ICE or other federal law enforcement in the area. 'I'm not hearing from any person of color or minorities that they feel safer or that they think that the police presence is here to quote, unquote, restore safety or security, right? It's quite the opposite,' he says.
