![]() |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Entrapment: COP: Hi, I'm 14, wanna get together and do it in the McDonald's ball pit? PERV: Durr, ok! Not entrapment: COP: I'm 14, how old are you? PERV: 35. Wanna get together and do it in the McDonald's ball pit? I think. And this seems fine to me. NT [/ QUOTE ] The first one will very likely NOT be considered entrapment. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Entrapment means the police created the crime. this defense almost never works. the only time I read about it working was when the postal inspectors or FBI repeatedly sent this guy kiddie porn in the mail. he kept not ordering it and not ordering. finally, aftera riduclous number of times he made one order. i think it was a U.S. Supreme Court case that threw out the conviction.
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Cop sits at his keyboard, typing. Cop: Hi! I'm a 12 year old girl, wanna chat? Suspect: What are you wearing? Entrapment? [/ QUOTE ] I see this to be entrapment for the fact that the 13 year old contacted the pervert, and not the other way around. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We had a thread on this a while back, IIRC. It had some pretty solid information in it.
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Cop sits at his keyboard, typing. Cop: Hi! I'm a 12 year old girl, wanna chat? Suspect: What are you wearing? Entrapment? [/ QUOTE ] I see this to be entrapment for the fact that the 13 year old contacted the pervert, and not the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] It doesn't matter, because the 13 year old is not inducing or suggesting any illegal activity. It's not illegal for a 40-year-old to just talk to a 13-year-old. |
![]() |
|
|