[SonofDjugashvili]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone else noticed that any time you apply this same process to any other kind of crime you end up with an absurd situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, try this one on:

Hajji wants to blow up a passenger airliner. He goes to a website dedicated to such fanatics, and meets "Ahmad", who is really Special Agent Martin Danno.

Hajji straps dynamite under his belt, and heads for the airport to meet "Ahmad". He is arrested.

Hajji is shocked to discover that there never was a "Ahmad", just Special Agent Danno. He's been duped.

Do you still think that Hajji has committed no crime?

(BTW, there are all sorts of examples that kids in First Year Law School are taught to demonstrate the legal definition of "intent". If you shoot me while I'm sleeping--but it turns out that I wasn't sleeping, I was already dead--you still go away for attempted murder. If I leap from a tall building to my certain death, but you decide to take out your gun and use me for skeet shooting practice when I'm halfway down, you're still going away for attempted murder.)

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. The law schools are so unimaginative - we got the same examples in Canada 10 yrs ago. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]