zenferret: Technically, "entrapment" can only be committed by law enforcement. Therefore, cries of "entrapment" are pointless all around.

Not exactly. NBC and Perverted Justice work closely with local police departments, making them defacto government agents and subject to the same standards.

It should also be noted that L.E. and Dateline/PJ do not initiate contact. They don't need to.

One would hope so in the case of NBC and Perverted Justice; it would be nice for a vigilante group to follow the same standards as the police. I think those TCAP specials are well-intentioned events that will end up damaging enforcement efforts made by the actual authorities, but I'd be all for them holding themselves to a high standard.

/no entrapment. Not yours.

Just to clarify for a second time: I am not advocating entrapment in this case, I was merely trying to give Researcher some basis in the root of the entrapment cries that seemed to anger him so (as fellow recent graduate, I can totally relate with him over being stressed out at the moment).

holeinmybucket: Is this entrapment? I did not intend to meet anyone and if the reporter/cop had not been there nothing would have happened...

Best answer: maybe (or "it depends"). Likely answer: no. The facts that might change the situation would have to do with the "hint" that you get before making the crude comment. If it's something like "Hey, big boy, I want you to ravage my underage body right now" then it's probably entrapment, but if the comment was "I like cake" then it's probably not entrapment.


Mmmm, cake...

boomerzz: Researcher: Ex; I have a shotgun, a ski mask, two sacks with dollar signs on them, and I'm about to walk into a bank, and the cops arrest me.

No crime?

Carrying a loaded shotgun around, yes. Brandishing. Take the shotgun out of the equation and no.

Carrying a ski-mask and two sacks with dollar signs into a bank, no crime.

Wearing a ski mask into a bank? Maybe, if there is a law against wearing a ski mask into a bank. Disturbing the peace? etc...

It's not attempted bank robbery.

What about someone asking you on the internet if you want to rob a bank, and you reply, SURE!!! I'll bring the ski masks! Then you go to your bank to make a deposit, is that attempted bank robbery?


Now, moving on, what if I'm a guy who really likes to fondle 30 year old cops that are pretending to be 13 year olds on the internet? So, I show up, and my dream is recognized!!! Where was the crime? Especially if you wrote it down in your diary and had an extensive journal about how you love police officers.


Moving back, I'd be the first to gut one of these guys doing something wrong. With a knife, personally. So, it's not like I like them or anything! I just don't get how we read their thoughts.

I'm sorry, but you're just plain wrong. You're arguing some sort of convoluted "remoteness" type thing. But if you're walking into a bank with the aforementioned stuff, and you are apprehended by law enforcement they most definitely CAN charge you with attempted bank robbery. I think in NY it's "conduct which tends to effectuate the commission of a crime" here all the conduct has, and I think a reasonable trier of fact (read: jury) would also conclude that.

Besides which, even if you argued that at the last second the would-be bank robber decided they didn't want to rob the bank, and tried to renounce their position, it would still fail, as just renunciation is not enough. He would have to, for example, throw his guns down and remove his mask BEFORE he was stopped.

Again, I'm sorry. But you're just wrong. "Attempt" is merely showing that the elements of the crime were there, even if the crime was not committed. So for bank robbery... you'd have intent (shown somehow, or imputed through conduct), and a bank.

Like in burglary, it requires you enter a dwelling (even a garage) with the intent to commit a felony. If you're stopped from entering, you still had intended to enter and commit your felony, so it stands.

Do not confuse lay language and common meaning with legal terms. These are terms of art.

Hoblit: zenferret because there was never a 13 year old and 30 year olds know how to manipulate people into doing things they might not otherwise. I'm not necessarily making this argument but I do acknowledge the possibility.

Hotness, I got your answer. Not really for your example, but if there's another test. When the government does "Outrageous or Obnoxious conduct", the kind where, although it might not be entrapment per se, it's repugnant to common notions of justice.

I think an example would be, and mind you this is SUPPOSED to be outrageous and obnoxious: The police get an six year old to run down the street naked. Then a wave of police follow her and arrest anyone who had a camera, camcorder, camera phone, etc who documented it and arrest them immediately for possession of child pornography. THAT would be a defense. It's not entrapment, but it is antithetical to our values as a society to do that kind of thing.

Phew.... thought you had me there for a minute.... har har.

zenferret: This still does not make them Law Enforcement - again, no entrapment. From a legal definition, civilians cannot "entrap" anyone.

*rubs temples* Look at it this way: there is a general rule that the police cannot use private citizens as instrumentalities to circumvent the law or the constitution (searches, seizures, and due process in particular). It's one of the situations where the police have to "play fair." Otherwise the official police would be two guys and the people doing all the investigations/research/whatnot would be "independent helpers" who violate constitutional protections in a way that would make even Justice Scalia's head spin.

Perverted Justice has, in fact, been involved in training Law Enforcement on these procedures. The "entrapment" argument just gets silly when you realize that the sting operations do not initiate contact - horny men on the internet do.

Doesn't matter who's doing the training in regards to the standards to which the police are held. And who initiates contact is just one (if at all) element to solicitation and related offenses, it's not an automatic sign of "we're not doing anything wrong!!"

If you initiate the conversation AND actually show up to meet the "13 yr old", how would this be "entrapment"?

Read all of what I said in the reply to that fact scenario posed by holeinmybucket and you might be pleasantly surprised.

Didn't you get enough of this the last time there was a thread about Perverted Justice?

This whole "online predator bust" thing has just become an easy way for a PD to get some publicity. They are not protecting children. They may not be entrapping the dudes, but they sure as hell are creating the opportunity for the crime. Are the dudes scumbag perverts? Yes. But do we want to waste our tax dollars prosecuting these guys? And what's really a waste is when a small town here in Oklahoma decided to pull a sting. They arrested like 20 dudes, 18 from out of state. So now state dollars are going to be spent prosecuting, and if found guilty, housing these losers. I really think we have better things to spend out limited police resources on.

captainorbaggio: Damn, Researcher is owning you law n00bs left and right... too bad he's not savvy enough to see he's being trolled with epic successfulness.

The dude needs to take a breather or he's gonna pop. That's not a good thing with the bar exam around the corner... and if he's already taken it, then why the heck is he getting himself so worked up during a period that should be spent completely deflating?

captainorbaggio: Damn, Researcher is owning you law n00bs left and right... too bad he's not savvy enough to see he's being trolled with epic successfulness.

/knowing wink

I'm on menupages.com.... I can't decide between Thai or Pizza. Seriously... I'm really torn up about this. I'm starving but I don't know what I want.... so I keep flipping here and hope it takes direction ya know?

/I'm not kidding.
//I read alot more passionate than I am.
///I had thai yesterday.... but I'm sick of pizza.
////HELP!

Get the pizza, Researcher. I know you're saying that you're not as worked up as your posts sound, but yikes, it seems like you're one step from an ulcer... which makes spicy Thai a bad idea.

RembrandtQEinstein
I have a better idea that will cost taxpayers less money. Why not have the cops pose as 45 year old men in chat rooms and try to pick up any 13 year old girls/boys/whatever that show up. Then use the information the children provide to go to that kid's house and tell their parents.

Because all they would do is end up talking to are cops and vigilantes pretending to be 13-yr-olds.

/I know you meant "instead of", and you are correct. Anyone saying they are a 13-yr-old interested in sex with an adult is probably a cop or vigilante.

Solon Isonomia: Get the pizza, Researcher. I know you're saying that you're not as worked up as your posts sound, but yikes, it seems like you're one step from an ulcer... which makes spicy Thai a bad idea.

Going with chirpin' chicken. I appreciate your concern, but it's not warranted. And if it is? I'm having a smoke break and pondering nuggets vs. fingers. Oh, the eternal question...

/nugget man m'self.
//I'm off for now.

farkinsinism: I thought the internal question would be 'who do I bill for hours spent Farking...?'

Judging by his bio, I'm guessing he's going into criminal. As a prosecutor, he wouldn't be billing the state/county/city on an hourly basis. As a defense attorney, he'd probably be charging a flat, up front fee (never ever say "sure, you can pay me after the criminal trial"). Which means, sadly, he can't bill anyone for this.

Unless he's in a big firm that tracks hours... big, evil, soulless places that give you six figures right out of school...