DHS: Come here, little girl

Having solved the problems of domestic terrorism and hurricanes, the Department of Homeland Security is now taking a well deserved vacation — with 14 year old girls, according to this account:

Deputy Press Secretary for U.S. Department of Homeland Security Arrested on Polk County Charges

Brian J. Doyle, DOB 4/7/50, the Deputy Press Secretary for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Public Affairs in Washington, D.C., was arrested this evening at his residence in Silver Springs, Maryland, on 23 Polk County charges related to the use of a computer to seduce a child and transmitting harmful materials to a minor. Doyle’s arrest is the result of a joint investigation by the Polk County Sheriff s Office, working with Florida’s 10th Judicial Circuit State Attorney Jerry Hill s office, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Inspector General s Office.

Sploid provides some details:

Over the next two weeks Doyle, who turns 56 on Friday, engaged in several sexually explicit online chats from his computer at the DHS. He would tell her in detail all the things he hoped to do to and with her.

Doyle was so obsessed he gave her his DHS office and cell phone numbers, and his instant messaging address. When words failed him he would email her dirty video clips.

Occasionally he would ask her to masturbate while thinking about him. He desperately wanted the girl to buy a web cam so he could watch her defile herself. He promised he would do the same for her.

Eventually he even had phone sex with an undercover agent posing as the imaginary 14-year-old. The content of these conversations has been deemed too explicit for release.

I’m very grateful that DHS is out there to protect us — especially the children. Props.

UPDATE BY MICHAEL HAMPTON: Doyle is refusing extradition to Florida. He is being held without bond in Montgomery County jail and has an extradition hearing set for May 4th.

Stephen Gordon

I like tasteful cigars, private property, American whiskey, fast cars, hot women, pre-bailout Jeeps, fine dining, worthwhile literature, low taxes, original music, personal privacy and self-defense rights -- but not necessarily in this order.

  1. Yeah .. those are the trustworthy people we put in places
    to protect us …
    Guess we’d be just as well off putting Bin Laden as head
    of security while we’re at it ..
    Anyways .. the guy’s an idiot and i hope will be thrown
    in jail never to come out. These are the people we need
    most be protected against.
    Nowhere do i see if ti’s a political appointment of
    Bush .. but lately .. the whole US Bush gov seem to be
    heading straight to prison .. Where i beleive they belong in
    the first place.


  2. Pastor, I think the original German version sounded better or is it worse I don’t know.

    I guess I should be more careful where I click, now I will have to disinfect my PC.

  3. Can’t we just say that Doyle is simply a bad dude? There are bad guys everywhere, maybe even where you work. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the Department of Homeland Security (I’d never do that!), but the guy is a bad sed. This guy could have been lingering anywhere.

  4. We all feel strongly against children being preyed upon, but come on. There is no child involved. I wonder if there had been a real 14 year old, if she would have had his attention at all. Has anyone talked to a 14 year old? Oh yeah, like you know, I love, like when you, you know, do that thing, with you know…

    There are very real cases of abuse in the world. For cops to put up a profile and lure someone to an “almost” crime is ridiculous.

  5. Besides the fact that the guy is human garbage there is a security issue here. He actually gave his office number, his cell phone number, information that is NOT supposed to be given to just anyone if you work at homeland security. What if instead of an undercover cop it had been a member of a terrorist organization? How much sensitive information could have been given away with the proper manipulation?

    As for not having his attention if it had been a real 14 year old….come on, you troll for sex with children, you aren’t looking for personality. He was getting off on the idea of having sex with a child, not because of her engaging personality. Besides, I’m GUESSING that the officer rather lowered her usual level of conversation to seem realistic.

  6. The next thing we will see is Al Qaeda posing as 14 year old children.

    I have to wonder though, would entrapment be applicable to any of this?

  7. David — unfortunately due to legal precedent, the concept of entrapment is irrelevant. It’s more like a fishing expedition, from what I’ve seen in the media.

    Entrapment is: “Take this cocaine from me or get shot. Look! You have cocaine! Twenty years for you!” (Overblown I know.)

    This is more… “Let’s put a pound of cocaine on the sidewalk and see if anybody picks it up.” Since they’re pressing charges for his *attempts* — and the law makes the distinction that it is the *INTENT* that matters, not the material (you can be charged for drug distribution for selling baking soda in plastic bags) — then entrapment doesn’t apply.

    That’s my understanding, anyhow.

  8. I agree that this guy is twisted, maybe even evil.
    I have a daughter myself.
    I’m glad he’s out of circulation. But…

    I agree with Michelle.

    Are the rest of you OK with a system where police can carry on a long term fraud in hopes of causing someone to commit a crime?

    Isn’t it possible that this guy has never done something like this before and would not have gone this far but for the police’s fraud leading him on?

    I thought police only have the rights we soverign citizens delegate to them. I can think of no situation where I would have the right to do something similar as a citizen.

    Please don’t flame me with the facts of the law and court precidents that prove it is legal for the police to do this. That’s not the point.

    The point is how does a Libertarian see this action. I find it funny that so many of us are so quick to condemn the action of authorities in making otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals over drugs, yet we don’t do it over this.


  9. “for ’tis the sport to see the enginer hoist in his own petar” the bard has never spoken truer words (okay, the lawyers one comes close)

  10. Bruce, compare it with the stiff penalties for DUIs. The consequences are so harsh for a first-time DUI because they’re predicated on the assumption that by the first time you’re caught, you’ve done it multiple times in the past. Operations like this are condoned because of behavioral studies of offenders. Pattern and practice, and all that…

  11. Of course, this all goes back to another realm — as much as we dislike it these days, looking at several of the laws still on the books governing ages of consent and ages by which one may get married…

    a man having sex with a 14 yo girl *can* be legal in the states. Maybe the DHS officer was lookin’ to trade in his current wife for a newer model?

    There’s a great deal that’s wrong with this whole situation. The biggest problem with cutting out this particular practice is that it’s really one of the few effective tools they have.

    This all amounts to the following: In this case, I have no good (or “libertarian” for that matter) answer.

  12. I mentioned Frank Figueroa a few months back. Maybe I should have paid more attention to him. But at least in his case, there actually was a 16 year old woman around.

    As for the current case, I called this thought crime, because that’s all he’s really done is to think about sex with a 14 year old.

    This society really needs a reality check with respect to sex.

  13. #14 Mushuweasel,

    OK, but just a week or so ago we were all getting righteously indignant about the Texas Alcohol Control Board arresting people for drinking in bars. The excuse was that they were being preemptively arrested because they might commit a crime in the future. Now you’re saying that it’s OK to penalize someone because, statistically, they “might” have commited a crime in the past?

    Your words:
    “The consequences are so harsh for a first-time DUI because they’re predicated on the assumption that by the first time you’re caught, you’ve done it multiple times in the past.”

    I would think that it would be best to punish someone for what you can prove they are doing in the present.


  14. #18 continued…

    #14 Mushuweasel,

    You finished by saying:
    “Operations like this are condoned because of behavioral studies of offenders. Pattern and practice, and all that…”

    Condoned by whom? Not condoned by me. They may be condoned by the majority of the sheeple in our American society, but the question I posed was whether they are condoned by the majority of the (presumed) Libertarian thinkers who post to this blog.

    If so, you need to show me what Libertarian principles are at work in such a “sting” before I agree. Am I missing something?

    Again, I do not defend this guy’s actions, I abhor them. But it’s just too easy to get on the “ends justifies the means” band wagon here.


  15. Entrapment was mentioned earlier. I loved Ian’s point, but entrapment defined is:
    en·trap ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-trp)
    tr.v. en·trapped, en·trap·ping, en·traps
    To catch in or as if in a trap.

    To lure into danger, difficulty, or a compromising situation. See Synonyms at catch.
    To lure into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.

  16. Main Entry: en·trap·ment
    Function: noun
    1 : the action or process of entrapping
    2 : the state or condition of being entrapped; also : the affirmative defense of having been entrapped by a government agent (as an officer or informant) —see also PREDISPOSE
    NOTE: Entrapment is available as a defense only when an agent of the state or federal government has provided the encouragement or inducement. This defense is sometimes allowed in administrative proceedings (as for the revocation of a license to practice medicine) as well as criminal proceedings. In order to establish entrapment, the defendant has the burden of proving either that he or she would not have committed the crime but for the undue persuasion or fraud of the government agent, or that the encouragement was such that it created a risk that persons not inclined to commit the crime would commit it, depending on the jurisdiction. When entrapment is pleaded, evidence (as character evidence) regarding the defendant that might otherwise have been excluded is allowed to be admitted.

  17. My God, what kind of perverts do these people have working up there? I’m speaking of Brian Doyle? What kind of security are they providing if they can’t even screen their own employees. How dare they waste my tax dollars on this perversion. Entrusted and empowered government officials free to solicit American children for sex and use government issued cell phones and computers to do it. Homeland Security is supposed to be protecting our children, not exploiting them to satisfy some dirty old man’s lust. How many more perverts are on their (MY) payroll. Homeland security is a joke and should be disbanded. What hypocrisy. Shame on the Bush administration and the entire Republican Party. This type of behavior makes me sick and ashamed to call myself an american.

  18. Michelle — I see the logic you’re using here, and while I can’t say I totally agree with it, nor can I say I also cannot say I totally agree with it, I *can* definitively say that the logic wouldn’t hold up in a court room (based on personal opinion; I am *hardly* a legal expert). Essentially, in what little (emphasize little) the reason entrapment can’t apply here is the simple fact that the police officer was far from the sole (supposed or otherwise) 14 yo on the ‘net available in that manner. That is to say, entrapment as a legal term implies duress by law enforcement officials. The idea is to pose as one of thousands of children of the age, and be no more enticing than any other. How well it’s done? That’s another story.

    Do not think I am defending the police in this, nor think that I am denying your point. It *IS* ‘thoughtcrime’; the crime is in the thoughts. Those thoughts *were* acted upon, and had she really be 14 he would have done the deed.

    Coitus Interruptus = sex?

  19. Ian, I am going to just make up something kind of wild. Play with me a sec.

    Hot teen looking for an experienced older man. I especially love a man in power. I may look young, but I am very experienced. Boys my age can’t get the job done and I desire someone with a bit more, um, stamina.

    Log on to a single porn connected site and you will get something similar in your bulk mail inbox. You may be directed to find someone on a “personals” page. Maybe you are a freak, maybe just lonely, but you check it out.

    Who knows what really happened? But a couple weeks of IM chat sessions are nothing. Especially when the harmed “child” doesn’t exist. And I know that this idea is unpopular with many, but parents need to pay attention to what their kids are doing. BTW, 14 year old girls are not immunized from attention seeking. Friends and I had a blast at 14 picking names from a phonebook to tell wives that we were also sleeping with their husbands. Technology 1984.

  20. Michelle, something I’ve been told, but have been completely unwilling to go try to verify, is that many of those underage solicitations and child porn websites actually are hosted, managed and operated by the U.S. government.

  21. My impresson is that the child DOES exist (ie he did solicit a 14-year-old girl to masturbate on camera for him), but that the person who the man had phone sex with was an agent.

  22. Yeah, yeah. Whateva’ you say. Of course, in ’84 I was three.

    So who’s counting?

    Another good example of what you’re talking about would be limewire. lol.

    I really do not disagree with you at all. The point I’m making is that if all the details involved in this situation, and yet the following remains the case (assuming the ‘sting’ operation ran as I witnessed on Dateline):

    The man went into what he believed was the home of a 14yo, with the intention of having sex with her.

    Now, this one’s going to probably put me on the fringes, but as an amoralist/atheist, I see nothing wrong with having sexual feelings towards an individual of sexually mature age. So I personally feel no moral outrage.

    But it’s still an “up there” crime… and anyone *stupid* enough to allow their impulses to control them to this extent… doesn’t belong in a position of authority of any kind.

  23. Nigel- a fantasy (in every translation) existed. Just because I think a guy is hot-maybe even wonder what it is like with a different hand touching me- does not make me an adulterer. Which brings to point Ian’s comment. If I act stupidly and seek out that hand- even in an online cyber tryst-then where else might I drop the ball?

  24. This man is charged with pursuing a fantasy- he broke the law doing so but may not have if not led on by police. Where is the IM content of chats outside of this one? Is it sick to think of a young girl in a sexual way? Yep. But hey, that’s us. He did not touch her. She did not exist.

  25. Ian, he never went to anyone’s home. I don’t know what they showed on Dateline, but if they claimed that, then it contradicts even the statements from the sheriff’s department. Or perhaps they are starting to make stuff up to make the situation seem more lurid and this guy seem more evil. I also noted that the sheriff here was very quick to do all the television interviews he could. What’s going on in HIS head that might be a thought crime?

  26. Guys, if I am arrested tomorrow, please bail me out. I went online to see if I could find 14 yo boys. (It is your fault MH) I thought that the law would be more lenient with me. Yahoo Personals told me that my search was invalid. I found some happening 18 YO boys, but I am going to redefine what I am looking for. You can witness that I am only researching and not looking to molest kids.

  27. Hey, don’t look at me. I’m not luring you into an encounter with a 40-something cop impersonating a 14 year old boy.

    By the way, Doyle is refusing extradition to Florida. He’s being held without bond in Montgomery County jail and has an extradition hearing set for May 4th.

  28. Dude, you are not FL police. LOL I have (through wine courage) expanded my search. I think that if I am questioned, this blog would prove that I am not trolling for little boys to use as toys.

    BTW- it is hard as hell to find kiddie personals.

  29. Nigel, there is nothing that I can easily turn up and tomorrow I may be too afraid to attempt a search. Maybe I do not know the lingo and appropriate search techniques, but I do not see a pervasive problem. I see a trap created for a small segment of the population.

    I just realized that I see it this way. I attempt to protect my daughters through discussion. Before the internet there were dirty old men. We are not dealing with anything new. Mr. Freddie tried to shove his tongue down my throat after I cut his grass one day. He died-not by my hand-shortly after. What we fail to realize is that while there is new technology, mankind has not seriously changed. The only change to be measured is that which refers to social perception. Social perception does not change physiology. 14 is only immature because we have made it such.

  30. Michelle — The dateline comment was in reference to a similar sting operation, and in that case charges were only brought to those whom actually entered the home. Not making claims that it references this individual.

    And with regards to your most recent comment: It is a trap. I don’t know *just* how wrong it is… well, that’s not a conversation that belongs here. (I don’t think of that with my Libertarian cap.)

    As I stated earlier — 14, even 13 and 12 in many cases — is only immature because we define it so. (On a sexual basis that is. Psychologically, the brain itself matures roughly around 16, and the body fully matures around 25… and generally reaches agapic maturity around 80.)

    With all of that, what defines someone who can make decisions for themselves, or who is healthy to lust after?

    It’s just not an easy conversation to determine a good answer for.

  31. Michelle, I wouldn’t go anywhere near true.com.

    Browsing through whois records, I find the company tied to one H D Vest Investigations, a private investigation firm, and Checkcare, a collection agency, all three of which are tied together by one Patricia Bellows. She shares an address and phone number with one Michael Bellows, a real estate agent, living at 1901 Dalton Dr, Flower Mound, TX 75022.

    Amazing what you can find on the Internet these days.

  32. I wonder that Der Fuerer, I mean President Bush has to say about this issue. As of now I have yet to hear his response. Furthermore, I wonder what the “family values” lovers who helped re-elect Bush have to say about Mr Doyle and his actions.

  33. Scott “Your head a splode” McClellan basically spouted the standard “We’ll cooperate with the investigation” bullshit, without saying anything of substance.

  34. I went online to see if I could find 14 yo boys.

    How amateur. Experienced older women looking for 14 year old boys know that the way to go is to get a job as a scoolteacher. Since you already have a job, see if your company will let you have some flextime to give back to the community by teaching school part time.

    Only men can find 14 year olds on the internet, whether it’s boys or girls.

    Just ask Mary Kay Latorneau and the other gal (in Tennessee?)

    Recent social redefinition of age of maturity conflicts with human biology, causing serious social problems, which only the government can solve, naturally….

  35. **donning red/blue hat**

    But Paulie… The Government is Good! How *DARE* you insult that which is Good!

    **removing red/blue hat now**

  36. East Asia has always been at war with Oceania, and I have always loved big brother. And little sister.

  37. **donning red/blue hat**

    Careful, that can get you shot in some neighborhoods.

  38. Paulie — naw. That’d be “**donning red/blue bandanna**”

    I said *hat.* Don’t make be bust a cap in yo’ ass. >:)

  39. naw. That’d be “**donning red/blue bandanna**”

    I said *hat.*

    Blue/red headgear, in any event. Or blue/red anything.

    Many gangs identify with a particular color and display that color by flashing it. This is commonly done by wearing or displaying a colored T-shirt, bandanna, hat, or belt, and color cordinated shoelaces. Some colors commonly associated with major gangs are blue with the Crips and Sureños, and red with Bloods and Norteños. In recent times, due to increased vigilance by community members and law enforcement officers, more subtle patterns have been adopted, such as wearing a colored t-shirt under a white or black one, wearing clothing with colored details or insignias, or flashing using shoelaces.

    Don’t make be bust a cap in yo’ ass. >:)

    peace through superior firepower

    new headline here: Big Brother Loves Little Sister