A state police sergeant who allegedly sent sexually explicit messages over the Internet to an undercover federal agent he thought was a teenage boy faces up to five years in prison if convicted, according to a spokeswoman for the FBI.

O’Hare is a 19-year state police veteran assigned to the Holden barracks.

He was arrested Friday after driving to the Meadow Glen Mall in Medford to meet a “teen” with whom he had corresponded in an online chat room, Marcinkiewicz said. At the mall, O’Hare found FBI agents waiting for him and he was taken into custody.

O’Hare, who also is a lieutenant colonel with the Massachusetts National Guard, was suspended by the state police. He remains a guardsman, Maj. Winfield S. Danielson said Monday, and has been reassigned to administrative duties pending outcome of the case.

In Afghanistan, he was provost marshal at the Bagram Air Base. When he was in Iraq, O’Hare was the executive officer for the 211th Military Police Battalion supervising training for Iraqi police in Balad.

Yes, I realize he’s innocent until proven guilty. There’s always a question of entrapment in cases like this. But, cripes, he fits just about every stereotype that ever illustrated the tales of Imperial Guards who get off on uniforms and pederasty.

  1. Mr Fusion says:

    What can you say about a case like this. It is not as if NBC’s Dateline hasn’t been letting people know how easy it was to trap pedophiles. Maybe we need more of these sting operations televised until SOME get the idea that you can not only be caught, but shamed in front of the whole country.

  2. Mike Voice says:

    Maybe we need more of these sting operations televised until SOME get the idea that you can not only be caught, …

    Actually, that is exactly what I don’t want – for the real predators to be warned-away from sting operations.

    I have doubts about charging someone with a crime if the only thing they did was exchange emails with an FBI agent… even after I read this:

    The FBI had sent a picture of a teenage boy to O’Hare and he allegedly sent back a photo he said was of himself.

    How can he face a charge of coercion and enticement of a minor under 18 years old to engage in prostitution or sexual activity. if there is no minor being coerced or enticed?

  3. malren says:

    It’s called intent, and it’s an ancient concept of law.

  4. YIPPY!
    Nice to know Sargent McRuff is on the job writing little boys across america!
    Many Cops act if they are above the law! UGH!
    Why in the world would any adult send a minor an explicit picture and then drive to meet him?
    Since he didn’t have sex with the little tyke I doubt much will happen.

  5. Ryan Vande Water says:

    Mike, if you visit someone YOU THINK is a prostitute but is actually an undercover officer, you’re guilty.

    If you buy a bag of sugar that YOU THINK is cocaine, you’re guilty.

  6. Mike Voice says:

    It’s called intent..

    Yes it is, and he seems to be guilty of “intent to…”.

    But is that what he is being charged with?

    If I tried to kill someone and failed, I would expect to be charged with attempted murder – not murder.

    If I tried to rape a woman and she escaped, I would expect to be charged with attempted rape – not rape.

    He tried to meet with a fictional teenager [who had a vested interest in stringing him along]. I think he should be charged with “attempted” coercion/enticement – not coercion/enticement.

    I am not opposed to luring predators into the open, I applaud that.

    I just think the charges should accurately reflect the crime committed.

  7. Mr Fusion says:


    He had all the intentions of meeting someone he believed was underage for the purpose of having sex*. If he had actually met up with his target instead it would have been even worse.

    If pedophiles believe that there might be a sting operation then they will think twice before actually trying out their fantasies. Scare them into knowing they might not be meeting some 14 yr old !!! It is more important to prevent the sexual abuse of a minor then it is to put someone behind bars.

    When the Police warn that they will be conducting breathalyser tests then drunk driving usually drops. The same with seat belt and other offenses. Criminals won’t commit a crime if they think there is a chance they will be caught. That is why putting cameras outside your home, wiring the windows, and letting others know you have an alarm does more to prevent burglaries then it does to catch them.

    * he is still innocent until proven guilty.

  8. Emery Jeffreys says:

    How about a prize patrol sting. The cops show up to bust a cop with a video crew.

  9. Gary Lowes says:

    How can he face a charge of coercion and enticement of a minor under 18 years old to engage in prostitution or sexual activity. if there is no minor being coerced or enticed?

    Quite simply, we are in the process of criminalizing thoughts. If the authorities think that you think the person you are chatting with is 13, then in their eyes there really was a 13-year old.

    Soon, googling “child porn” will become a crime known as “intent to download child porn”

  10. FBI better make sure this guys doesn’t have a Nintendo DS, otherwise kids all over the world would be in danger!!!!

    Kidding aside, I think this guys should be brought up on charges. If he had this relationship going for 7 months, it’s very likely that he had some sort of sick idea in the back of his head. Meeting up with the kid was only the next step to furthering this relationship.

    If Michael Jackson has to go to court for this kind of weird stuff, better send this guy, its only fair.

  11. Tallwookie says:

    bah – hang him, and be done with it

  12. Dan Collins says:

    It won’t be long and they will be tracking where everyone goes on the internet.Can anyone stand that kind of scrutiny?Thatsaid Hang him by his balls.

  13. Mister Mustard says:

    >>Soon, googling “child porn” will become a crime known as “intent to
    >>download child porn

    Yes, Gary Lowes, and we will have the Bush administration to thank for it. Even thought 1984 was over 20 years ago, it has just arrived in America.

    Solisitation of a Minor via the internet with intent to carry out a sex act crime with a minor. Federal offense.
    The question (defense) Are the law enforcement agencies use entrapment to catch the bad cop?

    I tend to agree with Gary that this is a lame way to catch criminal
    This seems to be the trend
    A boy could be on the other end typing and whos to say that the cop wasn’t going to meet the boy and explain to him that he shouldn’t chat with people he dosn’t know. Perhaps the cop just wanted to be a big Brother to the kid.

    I had cops tell me to admitt to a crime I didn’t do and they would say I let me off the hook if I admitted I did it but if I don’t tell them they will lock my a## up.
    Then they actually said they would lie and say that I did it. Since I didn’t do anything I kept my mouth shut and eventually they had to let me go.
    Its hard to trust a cop when you know most are dishonest and will lie to make an arrest.

  15. You gotta love the episode of COPS on TV when they have atleast 6 cops holding the guy down. One with a knee pinning the guys face to the pavement and the rest yanking on his arms and other body parts yelling out stop resisting arrest!

  16. jasontheodd says:

    I have nothing against cops, honestly. But I feel bad cops should get a more severe punishment for a crime than a civilian would. The same for anyone who places themselves in a position of trust and authority (judge,lawyer,president of the United States.)

  17. david says:

    Sucking a baby’s penis is legal in New York. As long as it is done in the name of religion.

    You see, our reality is based on words and meanings. To change reality, change the word. So by changing pedophilia to metzitzah b’peh, performnig fellatio on a new born baby is permissable. Metzitzah b’peh is a ritual where a rabbi sucks the head of an eight-day-old baby’s just-circumcized penis. Unfortunately, the reason this was in the news is that the rabbi transmitted the herpes virus to the baby, and he died a few days later as a result.

    Read The New York Times article:


  18. malren says:

    It seems that some people aren’t familiar with the legal concept of intent. Of course that doesn’t stop them from commenting.

  19. david says:

    malren, if someone places an apple on top of your head and takes a practice shot with a bow and arrow but strikes you in the forehead instead, his intent was to get the apple–not you–therefore nothing wrong has happened. As far as I know, intent is not everything in the law which is why there are penal codes regarding stupidity, aka, negligence. A drunk driver runs down a family member. He did nothing wrong because his intent was not to kill anyone. Etc.

  20. AB CD says:

    Did he have Star Trek stuff on his wall?

  21. Mike Voice says:

    It seems that some people aren’t familiar with the legal concept of intent.

    Guilty as charged! 🙂

    Of course that doesn’t stop them from commenting.

    Well, that’s all these are – comments on a blog.

    My questioning of the charges stem from the fact that this “intent” only manifested itself after …an explicit seven-month chat room courtship….

    It took 7-months of explicit “chat” ??? Seven months???

    Does the agent who posed as a teen just have a gift for this sort of thing, or [more likely] did the FBI provide training and/or advice from Psychologists??

    O’Hare’s defense attorney should have a field-day reviewing the transcripts to find all the times the agent encouraged O’Hare, whenever he had misgivings.

    As the story states:
    At several points during the sting, O’Hare had reservations, according to a transcript of the chats included in the search warrant.

    O’Hare did not “lure” a teen into anything, a team of professionals made a months-long effort to lure him.

    I like the fact that such teams are out looking for predators, I just question the validity of the charges that appear to have been filed in this case.

    Of course, with plea-bargins being the norm in our courts, the charges are probably just the Prosecutor’s opening-bid to start the negotiations…

  22. Mr Fusion says:


    You bring up an extremely valid point. Just how much of this was entrapment. We also know that any excerpts were given by the prosecutor and will not be lenient or culpable to the accused.

  23. Ed says:

    “Intent” is a thought process. I wonder what our founding fathers would say about how far we’ve come. Too bad it isn’t in a nobler direction.


Bad Behavior has blocked 5603 access attempts in the last 7 days.