3 ms·

Can someone with more insight into this please explain if this can be considered entrapment? The suspect probably would have done or said nothing if it weren't

Can someone with more insight into this please explain if this can be considered entrapment? The suspect probably would have done or said nothing if it weren't for the "investigators".

afarrell 11y ago
Here is a webcomic drawn by an attourney which explains what entrapment actually is: http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633 http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633
- J_Darnley 11y ago
  Why wouldn't you link to this page to start with? http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=674 http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=674 And I would've said that most of these plots foiled by the FBI come as close as possible to entrapment without actually being so. They provide means, methods, opportunities, and it seems in some cases plenty of motive but not the initial spark.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    That is a better page to link to. His site isn't really optimized for people to link to, so I just linked to the start of the entrapment sections.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  That comic doesn't explain "what entrapment actually is" but rather it explains how a few trite but common misconceptions about the law as it pertains to those circumstances are not precisely entrapment. I don't think his reasoning is very good. ie: "It's amazing that this myth has stuck around so long when tons of undercover arrests prove it wrong every day" I'm not sure how an arrest can prove that since an arrest is not a finding of fact. IMO lawcomic is rather biased toward a prosecutor's definition of what s/he thinks the law ought to be. Maybe it's my own cognitive dissonance about the difference in what the law is and what I think it ought to be, but I don't have a favorable opinion of lawcomic. Now you've posted it here in defense of the prosecution of a mentally retarded man/child for an offence which he is probably incapable of committing without a non-trivial degree of assistance, and most likely would not have committed if he'd simply been left alone. Even though this case the prosecution may prevail in court, IMO it does not serve any useful purpose for the gov't to aggressively ferret out easily manipulable people by manipulating them until they sufficiently incriminate themselves.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    > in defense of the prosecution I should clarify that I do not condone the actions of law enforcement here. I just think that I think lawcomic is an interesting introductory resource.

Can someone with more insight into this please explain if this can be considered entrapment? The suspect probably would have done or said nothing if it weren't for the "investigators".

afarrell 11y ago

Here is a webcomic drawn by an attourney which explains what entrapment actually is: http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633 http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633

J_Darnley 11y ago
Why wouldn't you link to this page to start with? http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=674 http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=674 And I would've said that most of these plots foiled by the FBI come as close as possible to entrapment without actually being so. They provide means, methods, opportunities, and it seems in some cases plenty of motive but not the initial spark.
- afarrell 11y ago
  That is a better page to link to. His site isn't really optimized for people to link to, so I just linked to the start of the entrapment sections.
fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
That comic doesn't explain "what entrapment actually is" but rather it explains how a few trite but common misconceptions about the law as it pertains to those circumstances are not precisely entrapment. I don't think his reasoning is very good. ie: "It's amazing that this myth has stuck around so long when tons of undercover arrests prove it wrong every day" I'm not sure how an arrest can prove that since an arrest is not a finding of fact. IMO lawcomic is rather biased toward a prosecutor's definition of what s/he thinks the law ought to be. Maybe it's my own cognitive dissonance about the difference in what the law is and what I think it ought to be, but I don't have a favorable opinion of lawcomic. Now you've posted it here in defense of the prosecution of a mentally retarded man/child for an offence which he is probably incapable of committing without a non-trivial degree of assistance, and most likely would not have committed if he'd simply been left alone. Even though this case the prosecution may prevail in court, IMO it does not serve any useful purpose for the gov't to aggressively ferret out easily manipulable people by manipulating them until they sufficiently incriminate themselves.
- afarrell 11y ago
  > in defense of the prosecution I should clarify that I do not condone the actions of law enforcement here. I just think that I think lawcomic is an interesting introductory resource.