Search for Pedophile Blogger...ICK Factor

Parents' Ire Grows at Pedophile's Blog

The New York Times
Posted: 2007-07-29
LOS ANGELES -- The search for the self-described pedophile in the large-brimmed black hat commences nearly every day here, with findings posted on chat rooms frequented by mothers.
Photo Gallery: 'He's a Threat to Children'

Monica Almeida, The New York Times

Jack McClellan, 45, who calls himself a pedophile but says he has never sexually touched a child, has created Web sites in Seattle and Los Angeles detailing how and where he trolls for children.
He was spotted at a fair in Santa Clarita. He recently emerged from the Social Security office on Olympic Boulevard. He tapped away on a computer at the library in Mar Vista. Warnings have gone out. Signs have been posted.

And yet unlike convicted sex offenders, who are required to stay away from places that cater to children, in this case the police can do next to nothing, because this man, Jack McClellan, who has had Web sites detailing how and where he likes to troll for children, appears to be doing nothing illegal.

But his mere presence in Los Angeles -- coupled with Mr. McClellan’s commitment to exhibitionistic blogging about his thoughts on little girls -- has set parents on edge. One group of mothers, whose members by and large have never met before, will soon band together in a coffee shop to hammer out plans to push lawmakers in Sacramento to legislate Mr. McClellan out of business.

"Just the idea that this person could get away with what he was doing and no one could press charges has made me angry," said Jane Thompson, a stay-at-home mother in East Los Angeles who recently read Mr. McClellan's comments about a festival in her neighborhood in which he seemed to be describing her child.

Ms. Thompson is part of a movement to make it illegal to post images of children of any type on Web sites with sexual content or themes. "It became what I call a minor obsession of mine for the next six weeks," she said, "to get to know his crowd and the things they talk about."

Two months ago, Mr. McClellan said, he was more or less run out of Washington State, where he lived off and on with his parents, after the news media there and various Web sites drew attention to his activities, making him worry about his safety and that of his family. He had been posting nonsexual pictures of children on a Web site intended to promote the acceptance of pedophiles, and to direct other pedophiles to events and places where children tended to gather.

So he moved to Los Angeles, where he was born, to try to live a Southern California version of his former life. The climate was one draw, said Mr. McClellan in an interview near this reporter's office last week. But also "there are so many world-class children's attractions here, Disneyland, festivals and whatnot."

Mr. McClellan has refrained from posting pictures of children on his Web site, which was shut down by its host several weeks ago but which he intends to start again, he said, with a Dutch host. On the site, he has described fairs, festivals and other spots that he hits at least three days a week, all to the fury of parents.

It is both his actions and inactions that vex law enforcement officials here, who, while suggesting that they keep an eye on Mr. McClellan when they can, say they have no legal recourse against him.

"If you look at things he has posted, he clearly is a pedophile," said Lt. Thomas Sirkel, who works in the Special Victim' Unit of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

"Has he acted on it? I can't say," Lieutenant Sirkel said. "But I've been in this business for 20 years, and I have never seen one who has not."

Mr. McClellan, who is 45, refers to himself as a pedophile, but says he has never actually sexually touched a child, simply "embraced them in a nonsexual way, mostly in Latin American countries." He says he has never been convicted of a sex crime, and law enforcement officials in Los Angeles say they know of no convictions.

A check of available public records yielded no criminal history for Mr. McClellan, including under another name he said he used. Mr. McClellan, who said he was adopted, said he changed his name to that of his birth mother several years ago.

Lieutenant Sirkel would not say whether his department had Mr. McClellan under surveillance.

"Why should I tell him about our tactics?" Lieutenant Sirkel said. But he added: "I'd like to know where he is at, what he is doing and watch him awhile. I think he is possibly a dangerous man. In my opinion, he is a threat to children in this community, and people in the community are real concerned about him."

Two Web-based groups, Peachhead, which caters largely to mothers on the West Side of Los Angeles, and Booby Brigade, its counterpart across town, have been abuzz with chatter about "Jack" sightings, and some parents have taken to posting photos of him in parks, downloaded from the Web.

"This one really angered people," said Linda Perry, who runs Peachhead, referring to Mr. McClellan.

Mr. McClellan has been somewhat elusive. He lives largely in his car, he said, although he says he occasionally rents rooms. Asked how he makes a living, he would say only that he lives off of "public assistance, the kind where you're not allowed to work."

The parental reactions somewhat mirror those in the novel and film "Little Children," in which a community becomes enraged at the notion of a convicted sex offender living in their midst, and chase him down at every turn. Although Mr. McClellan is not similarly pursued, parents who recognize him at events often scream at him, he said, and he fears for his safety enough that he would not meet a reporter in a public place.

Law enforcement officials have clearly taken notice -- one mother posted on about her husband, a location scout for films, being asked to leave a park where he was using his camera. Mothers from Pasadena to Marina del Rey will soon gather to discuss possible legislative options, Ms. Thompson said.

Theirs will most likely be a difficult road. While posting pictures of children in sexual situations is a felony, posting them fully clothed in everyday situations is not, even in the context of sexualizing them by proxy, so to speak, First Amendment scholars said. Further, while inciting others to commit crimes can be illegal, it is unclear whether giving people links to children's book fairs is criminal.

"It is an interesting case," said Eugene Volokh, a law professor and First Amendment expert at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Professor Volokh cited a federal statute that bars the posting of bomb-making information on the Web, and suggested that a similar statute banning information that helps people find children to molest could be enacted, perhaps. But simply providing information about where children gather was not likely to constitute such a crime, he said.

In terms of children's images, he said: "The general rule is pictures of people in public are free for people to publish. Now if it is without permission and the person is a child and he suggests the children are sexual targets, you can imagine a court saying this is a new First Amendment exception. But it would be an uphill battle."

So for now, then, many Angelenos will continue to track and record Mr. McClellan's every move. Ms. Perry of Peachhead noted that the city was full of convicted child molesters.

"At least we know who he is and what he looks like," she said.

Alain Delaquérière contributed reporting from New York.
lone wolf
ICK factor? Yes. In a way, he may be doing a community service in making parents aware how a sick mind works. I know my kids would be made wary of where this guy or his kind may lurk.

edited - harrassment
Last edited by Zan; Jul 29th, 2007 at 05:29 PM..
Joe, you just finished being you think your idiotic little 'spelling' mistakes are going to fool anyone? Are you trying to get banned again? You are the only person I know who could make fun of a rape victim. You are so pathetic!
Last edited by daisygirl; Jul 29th, 2007 at 05:14 PM..
edited - harrassment
Last edited by Zan; Jul 29th, 2007 at 05:30 PM..
Then you should edit your post to be "Dreadfull" and not "Dredfull" who should see a "Doctor', and thus the implication that DocDred is a paedophile. Its not a joking matter for personal insults, no matter how funny you find it.

Seriously, the rape of a child isn't some joke you should use for personal whiney grudges, grow up.
edited - harrassment
Last edited by Zan; Jul 29th, 2007 at 05:30 PM..
Joe, you have fooled no one. You are trying to bait Doc and that becomes my business as a member of this community. And don't you dare talk to me in that manner!
A truly scary thought is that there are many sites out there where pedophiles can chat about various things they would like to do, but since they don't break any laws they cannot be arrested. I cannot remember where I read this(it may have been from a thread here, actually), but I must admit that it is pretty shocking to know that.
Hi Shadow. We were talking about that on the Vine. I was one of the ones that was vehemently opposed to that type of site, even though it was based on thought, but most of you were a little more tolerant than I, since there was a very fine line involved.
On the face of it it seems like free speech. However, he has posted photos of children without thier parents consent and that's something that should be addressed. I think the law can be changed to say that photos of persons under the age of 16 or so cannot be published without guardian written consent.

As for what he's doing...yeah, its kind of icky. But he has the same right to free speech as anyone else. He isnt advocating any illegal activity. He said on his site and in his interview that sex should be consentual. He claims he does not touch children, only watches them. There's no law against that.

On the other hand, someone has made a website using his name to damn him and his actions. While I don't necessarily think McClellan is a good guy, the spoof site would seem to be illegal. Its in court at the moment and frankly I think should shut down. The guy who owns it is not named Jack McClellan and its sole purpose is to harass the real McClellan.

It comes back to what we've been talking about. Should thoughts be illegal? If I think about killing someone should I go to jail? If I tell someone these thoughts is that a crime? If I tell the person Im thinking about killing him, that's not a crime but if I say "Im going to kill you" that is a verbal threat.

Grey area at best. I wouldnt want to be the judge on those sorts of cases.
The vanity of his blog is what bothers me.

Whatever he espouses as his 'good intention' does not excuse that he is using valuable time to pronounce his deviation rather than seeking to help himself - which should be the foremost objective in his life - that is if he is serious.

It is like teaching people how to experience smallpox by writing about it - instead of getting medical attention. Bad analogy but couldn't think of anything 'really really nice' to compare pedophilia with.

One of the key triggers in pedophilia is the first impression where any child of focus is in a natural setting - clothed - doing normal activities - laughing - playing - non-sexual presentation. That is the big turn on ...the possibilities in the monster's mind, the acquisition which would make one sick by reading all the methodology, the love imagined and expressed, the 'doing no harm' told in myth.
Totally self-involved and self-pleasuring all those head trips are - like a courtship.

By the time molest occurs, the thrill has already started to wane. It is the devouring and conquering of the innocence that is the deviation, not the act itself - even while the act totally demolishes a child's future normality regarding sex, if that child is left to live at all.
He's not seeking help because he doesnt think he's doing anything wrong. And is he? Obviously the poentential is there, but so far has he done anything morally or legally wrong? What is it that we are objecting to? His watching children? How is that different from us watching sunbathers or looking at a coworker and getting stimulated?

You are such a fair-minded person you know? I wish there were more people like you in our world.

The 'courtship' I speak of is the preliminaries. His blog could be tantalizing for him to announce to the world he has his personal deviation and 'what are we going to do about it?' if he does not act on
his deviance.

My concern is how do we know he has not already acted? Perhaps at the ripe old age of thirteen - a younger playmate or cousin or even a sibling? These things do not flare up like a rash in adulthood.

And I guess the 'tell' here is the guy is discussing little children not adults on a beach or similar enticing, normal adult surroundings.

Bah - I prefer to read your post over and over again and nourish my attitude with good thoughts. Thanks.
I think his blog is vile and unnecessary, but how does a government go about banning such a thing unless he has committed a crime?

I would fear that if the government were to ban blogs such as his, the government would soon be banning other material which is viewed as crude, tasteless etc.
Sounds like he's got exhibitionist tendancies too.
Dreadful Nonsense
All I can say is why friggin why does this guy need to do this be honest i have not read his blog...the article my mind keeps shutting down as I read it..I can't concentrate on the story line...seriously i can''s like reading a subject in a war zone...if you catch ny drift...thats the best i can describe my reaction....

I'm really going on what you guys post.

Ohhhhhh he hasn't done anything...he says....why is this guy even the slightest bit concerned about torturing kids....Some guy in Vancouver wanted to write about this stuff and was in court and i think he won his case...where is the art in torturing children...once we as a society even in the slightest think there can be some sort of artistic quality to torturing's all frigggin over...i mean come on!!!

As i read the article though is there a chance that this guy is just showing people how he trolls for young it like some lesson in what to watch for???Sort of similiar to what the guy from the Who was doing and was charged and cleared on...god i'm blank.....

I cannot be neutral on this subject, sorry to say. I had a couple of students who were victims of rape and their subsequent behaviour was odd, to say the least. Even with help, these children as they grow up, will always have problems with trust and other issues.

The children are scarred for life and in many cases still feel that somehow it was their fault. Probably doesn't help that society as a whole still shuns these victims as adults since it is so widely believed that these poor children will be the next offenders. Either that or since it is such a distasteful topic, maybe society would rather just close their eyes to the adults and pretend that they don't exist.

Regardless, and I know it is a very fine line, allowing someone to have a site where they post their thoughts about what they would like to do to children is disgusting and I'm sorry, but I think it should be illegal. How would you like it if you discovered that they had posted a picture of your child on it and knowing that, realizing that, knowing that pedophiles somewhere are jerking off to it? Someone took that picture and maybe someone who jerked off to that picture, when he sees the real thing, might get overly agitated and kidnap your child.

There are just too many possibilities. Having been involved with child rape victims, I have seen that fine line crossed and I think our children are just too precious to take a chance.

Similar Threads

Egypt blogger jailed for 'insult'
by sanctus | Feb 23rd, 2007
Who Knew Matthew Good was a Blogger?
by Vanni Fucci | Aug 2nd, 2005
Are you a Blogger?
by Judland | Jan 29th, 2005
no new posts