Kevin Patrick Kendall, Sex Offender, Allegedly Tried Meet "13 y.o. Girl" from Teen Chat Room

Kevin-Patrick-Kendall_square.jpg
Kevin Patrick Kendall just can't keep his hands off minor girls, if an anti-child exploitation task force is to be believed.

A registered sex offender residing in Long Beach, Kendall is accused of sharing sexy talk in a teen chat room with a 13-year-old girl who he also arranged to meet.

The thing is, it wasn't really a 13-year-old girl.

The Orange County Child Exploitation Task Force (OCCETF)--whose members include officers from Homeland Security Investigations, the Orange County Sheriff's Department, the Orange County District Attorney's office and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service--was monitoring an online chat room advertised for teens ages 13-19.

Posing as a 13-year-old girl on Aug. 21, a special agent received an unsolicited message from someone using the screen name "Cali M." The netizen used sexually explicit language and expressed a desire to arrange an in-person meeting.

The next day, "Cali M" gave another name--"John Jay"--and he said he resided in Long Beach. A meeting was set up at Huntington Beach Pier, but as undercover officers waited, no one showed up.

Further OCCETF investigation led agents to suspect "Cali M" was really Kendall, a registered sex offender who had been arrested in Garden Grove in 2007 under similar circumstances. Agents on Sept. 7 went to Kendall's job in Claremont, where he is said to have admitted during an interview to having set up the meeting with the "girl."

He was arrested without incident on suspicion of contacting a minor online with prior conviction and arranging to meet a minor. He was then taken to Orange County Jail. A search warrant was later served as his Long Beach home.

Follow OC Weekly on Twitter @ocweekly or on Facebook!

My Voice Nation Help
17 comments
sisto.leal
sisto.leal

Heres a question for you who dont agree on this guy being prosecuted!So why are wiretaps legal & used?Why a conspiracy charge?Conspiracy is "Intent"...

ThoughtPolice
ThoughtPolice

So, this man was arrested for talking to a 13-year-old who wasn't actually a 13-year-old, and for saying he was going to go to a place that he didn't actually go?

 

As far as I can tell, no crime was committed here, unless we've begun prosecuting Thought Crime. Did I miss a policy paper on that? No? Nothing to see here, move along.

sisto.leal
sisto.leal

Intent...thats all it takes,I am glad they arrested this sicko...I hope he gets convicted on whatever charge he faces!

ckramer
ckramer

I am confused.... He never showed up. There was no 13-year old. Am I reading the plot synopsis of Minority Report?

BillxT
BillxT topcommenter

These guys haven't figured out that there are agents posing as minors with the explict purpose of caching them in the act, unbelievable, if I hadn't seen the evidence. I have to conclude that there is more than a lack of moral sense missing.

949girl
949girl topcommenter

 @ThoughtPolice I agree with you on this.  I do believe he probably thought he was speaking to a 13 year old girl and would have met up with her (he probably got spooked or new something was off and that's why he never showed up).  The fact is he wasn't speaking to a 13 yo and never did meet up with her so where is the crime?  Definitely seems like a pervert but you do need to be caught in the act IMO.  It's kind of like entrapment to me.  Not defending the guy but I also don't think he actually committed a crime....tough call.

pomparofurpo
pomparofurpo

 @ThoughtPolice

 No child = No crime.

Maybe he gets off talking to cops pretending to be 13 year olds, everyone knows all 13 year olds online are cops.

BettaRayBill
BettaRayBill

 @ThoughtPolice

He is a register sex offender, and engaged on sexual conversation and arranged to meet with whom he thought was a 13 year old girl.  I m sure he us out and about under de conditions that he does not go back to his old habits; sexually molesting little girls or minors, verbally or physically, communicate and be near them.  If those are the conditions in which he is out, he did violate them, hence he did break the law therefore, he should be in jail.  Also, just because the pigs didn’t see him, does not mean he didn’t go.  He could have spotted them before they spotted him and turn back.  I m not a cop like you (wild assumption) but that might just be intent which could be a violation.  It is plain and simple, which brings me to my one and only question.  Why so defensive, and practically advocating for the pervert?  Please forgive grammar and spelling, if any

breakfastinbeard
breakfastinbeard

 @ThoughtPolice HAHAHA. You missed the part where, after 9/11, nothing needs to be legal or reasoned or even factual for police to arrest you.

 

We are living in the post-rational American Empire. Your vote doesn't even count.

sisto.leal
sisto.leal

 @ThoughtPolice So,should the authorities wait around for this sicko to find a 13 yr old, to abuse so that he can be charged with a crime?Good thinking Jethro!!

sisto.leal
sisto.leal

 @ckramer Ill tell ya what...go up to an FBI agent & tell him you're "thinking" of robbing a bank!!Lets see how that goes...

BettaRayBill
BettaRayBill

 @BillxT

 

Of course there is lack of moral sense missing, or to better illustrate it.  For something to be missing first it should have existed in this guys.  They don’t have one and that s why they end up in this predicament. They literary think with their “junk” instead of their brain. Please forgive grammar and spelling if any.      

BillxT
BillxT topcommenter

 @pomparofurpo  @ThoughtPolice

 Apparently he didn't,   LMAO.

 

Just because you don't think there wasn't a crime, doesn't mean there wasn't, any more than he thinking that raping a 13 year-old isn't a crime, means that's not a crime. Obviously there a difference in degree, but it's still against the law to attempt to solicit a minor.

BillxT
BillxT topcommenter

 @BettaRayBill

 Oh, by the way, I've seen a BIT worse grammar in the OCW comments and other places.  Maybe you coud have typed "...  illustrate it, for ..." but I don't really see anything else. These comments are informal and strict rules are not needed.

 

Communication is the goal.

BillxT
BillxT topcommenter

 @BettaRayBill

 Well, I'm well in agreement, but I'm going to quibble about your statement about having to have been present at one time to then be missing. Trivial disagreement, though, I think we can agree to disagree on this and stay friends.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Fashion

Loading...