Chris Hansen Caught Cheating on Wife- On Tape

[Moyank24]

Departments do this all the time on their own, they don't want Dateline getting in the way ruining their investigations. Dateline's only reason for doing this was ratings not law enforcement.

I do recall when the series first started, and I could be wrong, at that time that many department's didn't have their own people doing it. They weren't doing it in major jurisdictions (IE New York City or Chicago or Houston). It's one of the reasons Perverted Justice does what they do. They are instrumental in helping the department's that don't have dedicated resources for internet predators. And in the show, Perverted Justice was doing the undercover work, not the departments. And one of the reasons, were the departments didn't have the capabilities to do it on their own.

Of course, they did it for ratings. But that still doesn't take away from the fact that what they did led to convictions.

 

[iJohnHenry]

To be fair the Enquirer as well as TMZ have been better reporting sources than the big outlets lately.

I am also shocked that this appears to be true.

They have actually won accolades from their peers.

They certainly take more time to dig than most main-stream news sources.

The print version of Al Jazeera??

 

[rdowns]

I'm sorry, I immediately take this with an enormous grain of salt because it is published by the National Enquirer. These are the people who keep publishing evidence of the end of the world, bigfoot sightings, Obama being a muslim, and alien encounters. I swear I saw a cover that said "Gay Aliens Found In Crashed Space-Ship" once.

That's not the Enquirer. While a trashy supermarket tabloid, they did break the John Edwards story.

 

[Tilpots]

I think it's fair to say that he was holier than pedophiles, shady garage door repairmen, and bike thieves, no?

Why was he scum? Now, quite possibly. Back then, not so much.

You're supposing this was the first time he ever cheated on his wife. I'm supposing it is not. Either way, he's a hypocrite. I'm not saying his actions are close to that of a pedophile, clearly they aren't. But adulterers shouldn't go around casting the first stone.

How is that gotcha journalism?

It's gotcha journalism at it's peak. What else would you define it as?

It's definitely wrong that he cheated on his wife...but with those specials they were going after criminals. So, I just don't believe we're comparing apples to apples here.

I'm seeing him like a politician in a scandal, a cop caught breaking the rules or a pastor lying to their congregation. These are usually people who've done some amount of good, but it doesn't excuse them for their wrongings. In fact most people in these powerful positions usually are held to a higher standard than most and rightfully so. Practice what you preach or it's gonna come back at ya.

Yes and no. I think what he has done in exposing pedophiles is great. He's a dumbass for cheating but he didn't cheat on her with a child. 20 years his junior does not make him a pedophile. He a somewhat attractive 50-ish year old man. If he weren't married dudes would be high-fiving him ... well some likely are.

Again, nobody likes a pedophile, but people also don't like an abuse of trust. He portrayed himself as a stand up guy fighting for justice, but in reality he's just another sleazeball cheating on his wife. The only high-fives I'd give out are to the news team who decided to dig a little deeper for this story.

 

[MacFan782040]

A few months ago I saw this at the supermarket, claiming Steve Jobs had "6 weeks to live". I also take this story with a grain of salt.

 

[rick snagwell]

wonder if he tried the sweet tea?

 

[Rooskibar03]

 

[torbjoern]

Christopher Edward Hansen is one of my favourite journalists because of the way he confronts people. Really - there's a reason why I had him as avatar for many months. Not only the show To Catch a Predator, but also other Dateline series are very good as well. One guy who worked with scamming old people into paying $$$ for cleaning their vents, was at tears when CH was done with him. Great work.

But on the other hand - it serves him right to be caught in a sting-op when he attempts to commit a lewd act. After all, he put himself in that position. So he thought it was ok... being married... to blank that 30-year-old girl when he's 52? It's more than 20 years in between - why prey on someone so young? What should happen, and what is his wife going to say?

 

[Thomas Veil]

Yeah, I don't get how it's "gotcha" journalism. These people willingly chatted with the undercover investigators, and willingly drove to the house with the intent to screw an underage girl. How is that gotcha journalism?

The problem I had with the show was not that they were doing stings, it's that NBC pretty much made a series out of it.

I'm old enough to remember Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes doing real investigative journalism, and he went after hypocritical politicians, crooked government contractors, business rip-offs and the like. It was rewarding TV, because Wallace was very straightforward about the way he confronted his targets, and it was illustrative, to the general public, of areas in which government and/or big business failed us.

Which isn't to say catching pedophiles isn't illustrative as well. It's the fact that once or twice is enough to show how that works. Watching Hansen do it over and over and over again...it just made me feel slimy. Now it's not informational anymore. Now it's sleazy entertainment. Now it's the cheap thrill of watching yet another scuzzball squirm as he realizes he's caught.

Oscar Wilde, when invited to an orgy, reportedly went once, and then turned down a second invitation. When asked why, he replied: "Once a philosopher, twice a pervert." That's how I kind of feel about these Dateline shows. Once informative, twice sensationalism.

 

[torbjoern]

You have some very good points there, Veil. But Dateline NBC is more than "To Catch a Predator", though.

 

[snberk103]

Why this fascination with what happened in the privacy of a bedroom? (I'm talking about what Hansen and his affair, not the Dateline show?)

So the man allegedly cheated on his wife. That's a bad thing. I don't condone it. But.... Whats the big deal. That is between him, his wife, and the 3rd party. It's not news. Would there be any interest in this "story" if there wasn't a sordid video of it? Would it be "news" if Hansen's wife had been allegedly cheating on him?

I must be really bored to even be commenting on this thread.... How about if I raise the stakes and muse that it is a particularly American thing to be obsessed with illicit sex? Ban anything remotely sexual in movies (though go ahead and watch gory violence (but don't show any bosums!)).... but then drop everything to watch a "news" story about someone else's allegedly sordid sexual encounter. Which was completely legal.

That'll make this thread a bit more interesting.....

 

[torbjoern]

Why this fascination with what happened in the privacy of a bedroom? (I'm talking about what Hansen and his affair, not the Dateline show?)

So the man allegedly cheated on his wife. That's a bad thing. I don't condone it. But.... Whats the big deal. That is between him, his wife, and the 3rd party. It's not news. Would there be any interest in this "story" if there wasn't a sordid video of it? Would it be "news" if Hansen's wife had been allegedly cheating on him?

I must be really bored to even be commenting on this thread.... How about if I raise the stakes and muse that it is a particularly American thing to be obsessed with illicit sex? Ban anything remotely sexual in movies (though go ahead and watch gory violence (but don't show any bosums!)).... but then drop everything to watch a "news" story about someone else's allegedly sordid sexual encounter. Which was completely legal.

That'll make this thread a bit more interesting.....

Just in case it wasn't obvious already: it's the whole irony about the circumstances under which he got caught, which is fascinating, i.e. sexual misconduct taped on hidden cameras. Whom would it serve better?

 

[snberk103]

Just in case it wasn't obvious already: it's the whole irony about the circumstances under which he got caught, which is fascinating, i.e. sexual misconduct taped on hidden cameras. Whom would it serve better?

The man is paid to be an entertainer, not to be a saint. He has human appetites like everyone else. What he did was tragic (and legal).... but it's not news. This morbid fascination with what he allegedly does behind closed doors, ironic or not, is - um, "curious" to say the least.

If he had been busted for doing what his show supposedly uncovers (I've never seen the show) then that would be news because then he would have been committing an criminal act, among other things. imho, of course....

 

[decafjava]

Christopher Edward Hansen is one of my favourite journalists because of the way he confronts people. Really - there's a reason why I had him as avatar for many months. Not only the show To Catch a Predator, but also other Dateline series are very good as well. One guy who worked with scamming old people into paying $$$ for cleaning their vents, was at tears when CH was done with him. Great work.

But on the other hand - it serves him right to be caught in a sting-op when he attempts to commit a lewd act. After all, he put himself in that position. So he thought it was ok... being married... to blank that 30-year-old girl when he's 52? It's more than 20 years in between - why prey on someone so young? What should happen, and what is his wife going to say?

Err 30 is not a girl. In this case the problem was he's married not the age difference (I didn't think he was 52). Nothing illegal here.

 

[iphonepiephone]

Excuse me, but who's business is it what anyone does, apart from their OWN, especially if it is personal relationship related.

I'm laughing that people are actually interested in the misdemeanours or affairs of others; mind your own business and stop gloating and prying, it has #### all to do with you. I suppose people like to feel superior, by poking their noses into the lives of others. Bad enough that you would care about anyone else's life, never mind a stranger!

SAD

 

[torbjoern]

The man is paid to be an entertainer, not to be a saint. He has human appetites like everyone else. What he did was tragic (and legal).... but it's not news. This morbid fascination with what he allegedly does behind closed doors, ironic or not, is - um, "curious" to say the least.

If he had been busted for doing what his show supposedly uncovers (I've never seen the show) then that would be news because then he would have been committing an criminal act, among other things. imho, of course....

Well, Bill Clinton was never paid to be a saint, either. Yet still, his alleged sexual misconduct (albeit legal) brought him to trial, even.

Err 30 is not a girl. In this case the problem was he's married not the age difference (I didn't think he was 52). Nothing illegal here.

Illegal or not, there's still lewd behaviour involved, and with someone 20 years younger than himself. Best thing would be if someone had asked him to "have a seat right over there" as well.

Excuse me, but who's business is it what anyone does, apart from their OWN, especially if it is personal relationship related.

I'm laughing that people are actually interested in the misdemeanours or affairs of others; mind your own business and stop gloating and prying, it has #### all to do with you. I suppose people like to feel superior, by poking their noses into the lives of others. Bad enough that you would care about anyone else's life, never mind a stranger!

SAD

What I'm trying to tell you people, is that in the show "To Catch a Predator" the legal matters are just a minor part, and it's CH's schadenfreude over questioning someone else's moral standards which is now coming back to haunt him.

 

[snberk103]

Well, Bill Clinton was never paid to be a saint, either. Yet still, his alleged sexual misconduct (albeit legal) brought him to trial, even.

Never brought to trial, he was brought before an "impeachment" which is an entirely political process. Plus, he was not brought up for impeachment for the supposed sexual acts, he was brought up for lying about them.

Illegal or not, there's still lewd behaviour involved, and with someone 20 years younger than himself. Best thing would be if someone had asked him to "have a seat right over there" as well.

Lewd? Perfectly normal. And legal. We have a good married friends who have 20 year age differences. She's the younger one, incidentally. In the Hansen case she was 30, supposedly. For all I care she could have slept with a 70 year old or a 20 year old, and it would not have been lewd. Subject to gossip, perhaps. But not lewd or news.

What I'm trying to tell you people, is that in the show "To Catch a Predator" the legal matters are just a minor part, and it's CH's schadenfreude over questioning someone else's moral standards which is now coming back to haunt him.

I actually kinda agree. From the descriptions I've read, his show was an entertainment piece, not news. Relishing in another human's downfall is... um, not nice. Unless you plan on being perfect for your entire life.

 

[torbjoern]

Never brought to trial, he was brought before an "impeachment" which is an entirely political process. Plus, he was not brought up for impeachment for the supposed sexual acts, he was brought up for lying about them.

How could he be brought up for lying about them, if there was no process (political or otherwise) regarding the supposed sexual acts in the first place?

Lewd? Perfectly normal. And legal. We have a good married friends who have 20 year age differences. She's the younger one, incidentally. In the Hansen case she was 30, supposedly. For all I care she could have slept with a 70 year old or a 20 year old, and it would not have been lewd. Subject to gossip, perhaps. But not lewd or news.

Depends on how we define "lewd". Even something which is just "lustful" and "indecent" (simultaneously) can obviously be described as lewd. Sexual conduct which involves adultery is (IMO) lustful and indecent. I have to admit that the age gap does not affect to what extent it's lewd or not - I just mentioned it anyway to use Chris Hansen's own rhetorics against him. Same goes for the usage of the word "lewd", which otherwise could be seen as a bit far-fetched to use in this context. It also has to be mentioned, though, that in many countries, Chris and his girlfriend would both be stoned to death for what they may have done.

I actually kinda agree. From the descriptions I've read, his show was an entertainment piece, not news. Relishing in another human's downfall is... um, not nice. Unless you plan on being perfect for your entire life.

These are examples of sarcasm and diatribe that he used during the Petaluma investigation:

Decoy: So what do you wanna do?
mannbay2004: Let's see how it goes.
Decoy: Ok, so you're playing hard to get, huh?
mannbay2004: M-hm.
Chris: (coming out from the shelter) Now, let's see how it goes.

Chris: Alright, so 20 years younger than you are. Why prey on somebody who says they’re 13?
a_latino_man_559: I didn’t. I didn’t, sir. I was—I was—I don’t—
Chris: You did— you did!! You talked to girl who said she was 13. You bought all the stuff. And you came over— Did you bring condoms? (this last question has formerly been asked by the decoy)
a_latino_man_559: Yeah. They’re—yeah. But, you know.
Chris: Yeah! You just said that a moment ago, so, no reason to lie about it.

 

[Moyank24]

I haven't caught up completely with this thread, but do we have confirmation that this video actually exists? Or will they be coming to an episode of Cheaters during the next sweeps week?

This thread begs for pics or it didn't happen.

i'm a little kidding. I still don't see how people are comparing a cheating husband to child sexual predators. But, to each their own.

 

[torbjoern]

i'm a little kidding. I still don't see how people are comparing a cheating husband to child sexual predators. But, to each their own.

It certainly can't be compared per se. But since there are parallels to be drawn (see above), there's still an irony in it when Chris Hansen is involved this way.

 

[decafjava]

It certainly can't be compared per se. But since there are parallels to be drawn (see above), there's still an irony in it when Chris Hansen is involved this way.

Ok I get the point you were making. Still think he is wrong for cheating but hey you know famous people think they are different. (See DSK aka the French "perv").

 

[KnightWRX]

It certainly can't be compared per se. But since there are parallels to be drawn (see above), there's still an irony in it when Chris Hansen is involved this way.

There's only parallels to be drawn if you're some kind of puritanical american. Seriously, guys cheat on their wives... it happens. There's a reason they do, maybe the marriage is going badly, maybe the wife isn't as sexual active and filing the needs of the husband anymore, maybe he doesn't feel attracted to her.

There's no irony here. The guy was catching sexual predators that preyed on innocent underage children. What he did, and what he denounced are 2 completely different things.

I don't get how americans can even equate "sex between consenting adults" into something vile and perverted. It's a perfectly natural thing.

 

[torbjoern]

There's only parallels to be drawn if you're some kind of puritanical american. Seriously, guys cheat on their wives... it happens. There's a reason they do, maybe the marriage is going badly, maybe the wife isn't as sexual active and filing the needs of the husband anymore, maybe he doesn't feel attracted to her.

There's no irony here. The guy was catching sexual predators that preyed on innocent underage children. What he did, and what he denounced are 2 completely different things.

I don't get how americans can even equate "sex between consenting adults" into something vile and perverted. It's a perfectly natural thing.

One doesn't have to be a puritanical American to see adultery as sexual misconduct (or "lewd" for that matter), even though it's far lesser in severity than preying on young teenagers. The fact that there's a difference in magnitude shouldn't be necessary to point out, even, but I write it for the record if not for anything else anyway. They are 2 different things, yes, but only as far as shoplifting is different from grand theft.

Equating adultery in its simplest form with something "vile and perverted" might be taking it too far, but then again, even the most powerful man in America can't allow himself to "eat here and there". Btw, I'm not American but I do remember the Clinton/Lewinsky-case very well.

 

[KnightWRX]

One doesn't have to be a puritanical American to see adultery as sexual misconduct (or "lewd" for that matter), even though it's far lesser in severity than preying on young teenagers. The fact that there's a difference in magnitude shouldn't be necessary to point out, even, but I write it for the record if not for anything else anyway. They are 2 different things, yes, but only as far as shoplifting is different from grand theft.

Hum, both shoplifting and grand theft are illegal. Adultery is not against the law, unless there's some kind of weird puritanical law in the US. So no, you can't equate the 2. At all. It's not like shoplifting to grand theft either. Your position on this matter if flawed. Adultery is a moral problem, you're equating it to a lawful problem.

 

[samantha89]

Yes and no. I think what he has done in exposing pedophiles is great. He's a dumbass for cheating but he didn't cheat on her with a child. 20 years his junior does not make him a pedophile. He a somewhat attractive 50-ish year old man. If he weren't married dudes would be high-fiving him ... well some likely are.

This.

A pedophile is something else. Man who look at (and want to bed) attractive, young women ... oh this is unheard of!