Printable View
I hope Busy is correct. If the entrapment laws are federal and not state by state then good good. I just wanted to be sure any excape route was closed.
That said, thinking about it, this sting was not set up by law enforcement, it was by a private television company. Would entrapment laws come into it as the police just arrested after a crime was comitted and didn't set the crime up.
Edit: I guess the key is to be sure no mistakes are made and any laws specific to each state are followed.
Video and computer evidence is used to prosecute.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
It's no different than what our News 7 I-Team did with a fella I played b-ball with. They used news footage to go after him for taking women's money when thought they were going to Chicago to see Oprah.
Didn't it say that the "victims" were actually deputised by the local Sheriff? So they would be treated as if they were law enforcement. In any casy, as Busyman said, it was not them who suggested the crime it was the pervert. It's only entrapment if the "child" had suggested the crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
I'm not arguing the definition of entrapment. I am concerned that the definition may depend on which state the sting is running in. The states all have their own laws and all have their own definitions of those laws and their own punishments.
Just the act of "talking dirty" to a minor may be an offense in some states but not others.
If entrapment laws are federal (the same whatever state one is in) and have been tested and ruled on by the supreme court then good good. ALL I am saying is that ANY possible technicality that would give even a faint chance of the pervert "getting off" would need to be removed.
as i said before
It's hardly a rare occuranceQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
how many times have you thought to yourself "you got to be shitting me" when you hear about some criminal getting off on an unbelievable technicality....
The Supreme Court has ruled in entrapment cases. Does that mean entrapment is a Federal issue, does the Supreme Court only deal with Federal matters?
The supreme court rules on individual cases, not all entrapment cases are the same. If the court finds that the "entrapment" violated the constitutional rights of the "accused" then that ruling for like cases sets the precedent for all states to follow. If they rule that it didn't violate his constitutional rights then the states are free to determine what level they will follow within that ruling. This could mean that they continue to "entrap" within this precedent or they could make their own laws forbidding entrapment.
Basically states can make their own laws but certain rights are guaranteed under the constitution and states cannot violate those rights.
Of course not everyone will agree with the supreme courts rulings.
disclaimer:
this is a brief explaination only and there are plenty of "ah but what abouts" that are not covered
Just when I thought I couldn't have a lower opinion of these perverts one manages to go one step further.
I've just seen a segment about dateline on th abrahams report and one guy took his own 4 year old son to a "meeting" with a 14 year old.:angry: