5 ms·

To avoid infiltration, MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. Secon

To avoid infiltration, MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. Secondly, how many schemes were cooked up by the U/C? There is no way to know. Certainly, his advice to the crew would be to go out and commit more crimes to buff up his own stats. He would never be a voice saying, "no, robbing a gas station is a bad idea." Instead, he would say, "why are we wasting our time on small potatoes? We gotta rob a bank instead." Informers manufacture crime where there otherwise would be little or none. These problems have been around for centuries and are nothing new: {the informers} were...the scourge of the people...Their careless or criminal violation of truth and justice was covered by the consecrated mask of zeal; and they might securely aim their poisoned arrows at the breast either of the guilty or the innocent...A faithful subject...was exposed to the danger of being dragged in chains to the court to defend his life and fortune against the malicious charge of these privileged informers. I Gibbon,Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire548, 49 {Modern Library ed.} See, "How to Spot the Informant at your Local Mosque": https://casetext.com/analysis/how-to-spot-the-informant-at-your-local-mosque https://casetext.com/analysis/how-to-spot-the-informant-at-y...

alphabettsy 5y ago
> Informers manufacture crime where there otherwise would be little or none. This certainly can be true, but how often it is or isn’t certainly is not absolute as your statement, nor is it easily measurable. Like many other issues regarding law enforcement, this certainly requires greater scrutiny.
mushbino 5y ago
The liberty city seven is a good example of just how far informants can go. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_City_Seven https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_City_Seven There are actually a ton of examples now that I'm thinking about it. Canadian entrapment laws are much more lax and it happens pretty frequently up there as well
- gadders 5y ago
  There is also some debate about the role of FBI agents/informants in the Governor Whitmer kidnap case: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-trial.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-tri...
  - gadders 5y ago
    Also: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment-fake-terror-plots https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment...
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Did you copy and paste one of the comments from the linked story? edit while trying to figure this out their profile says the post was from yesterday but thie comments section says from an hour ago. Which makes me find it more likely the same person posted it both places.
- pseingatl 5y ago
  If it was my own comment.
vkou 5y ago
If I'm a cop, and I suggest to you that we should go rob a bank tomorrow, and you actually show up at Main and Third to do it, that's not entrapment. That's just you being a bank robber. If I threaten you into doing it, that's entrapment. If I don't threaten you, and we talk about doing it, but you don't actually take any meaningful steps towards doing it, you're in the clear. If we talk about doing it, and you go out to buy a gun, and a ski mask, and find a driver for the getaway car, it's also not entrapment. Because you're taking meaningful steps towards carrying out a conspiracy. Even if I'm the one selling you the gun. And the ski mask.
- dylan604 5y ago
  It's still 100% total bullshit. For law enforcement to make any attempt at convincing someone to commit a crime so that they could then come in and make the arrest to solve the crime is absolutley something that should not be allowed. If I hire a hitman to do a deed, I go to jail more than the hitman. When a LEO convinces someone to do a crime, they need to go to jail too.
  - vkou 5y ago
    No, it's not. One of your responsibilities as a citizen is not getting involved in what you believe are serious criminal conspiracies. Another one is not getting involved in what actually are serious criminal conspiracies.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      People that commit these crimes "suggested" by undercover typically aren't the sharpest tool in the box. For LEOs to take advantage of that is reprehensible. One of LEOs responsibilities shouldn't be to see how many crimes they can get others to commit on their behest. It should be to catch those that commit crimes. We don't need more crime because LEO encourages it. That's just bassakwards logic.
      - mrslave 5y ago
        Jerry Drake Varnell needed the assistance of 3 FBI agents: one to seduce him online, another to pose as a bomb expert, and a third to teach him to drive a car.
changoplatanero 5y ago
There are ways to appear to commit a felony without actually doing it. For example, he could sell a large amount of drugs to another informant or he could rob a fake business set up by the fbi.
- metaphor 5y ago
  Do you seriously think these guys are like, "pick a crime and target, anything really so long as it's a legit felony...we'll give you a week to get creative, then when you're ready, we can all sing kumbaya while you demonstrate your loyalty to the group"? Color me unconvinced.
  - alex_sf 5y ago
    Yes, actually. The expectation is you handle your own business.
  - newsclues 5y ago
    In the past they have staged fake murders with photo evidence of their crimes to establish bona fides
vmception 5y ago
> So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. By being immune from such laws.
- qwertox 5y ago
  Yesterday I read a bit about the European Convention on Human Rights, where Article 2 – Right to life [0] left me thinking for a while. 2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary: a. in defence of any person from unlawful violence; b. in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; c. in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Conv...
  - dmurray 5y ago
    It's a bit loose, isn't it? You can shoot someone if it's the only way to prevent them ruffling your hair, escaping from an arrest for shoplifting, or inciting a political protest. But the ECHR is meant to be a lowest common denominator: states are encouraged to have their own stricter prohibitions on human rights abuses.
- monkeycantype 5y ago
  There’s a case in Geelong Australia where a stabbing was caught on grainy cctv, people knew who the perpetrator was, but there was no hard evidence. The undercover police set up a fake gang that recruited the suspect, and performed fake burglaries on prepared targets as part of their attempt to get him to confess, including the tv show staple of the undercover police officer cell mate, none of which worked he never confessed to the crime to his fellow ‘gang members’ This is the case: https://amp.abc.net.au/article/9687114 https://amp.abc.net.au/article/9687114 It was said to be the states most expensive unsuccessful undercover operation, after the operation was shut down a million dollar reward was offered. I believe it was evidence that was then provided that lead to a conviction
Terry_Roll 5y ago
>To avoid infiltration, MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. Sounds like many entities, politics, business, masons, military, police, nhs. Its the same thing over and over again, break a rule/law, say you didnt see something and watch the promotion's occur. As long as humans and money exist you will always have corruption but some happen to be on the right side of the law and others not.
cbsmith 5y ago
Mo Kane I presume?
- pseingatl 5y ago
  :)
tveita 5y ago
> MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. > Informers manufacture crime where there otherwise would be little or none. These points are contradictory - crime is a required part of the initiation, but they also would not have done any crimes without the undercover agent tricking them? > He would never be a voice saying, "no, robbing a gas station is a bad idea." Why should he have to be? Do you think it would have helped? Maybe they should be sending in "undercover moms" instead to deradicalise gangs.
tomohawk 5y ago
This post seems to be suggesting that the main cause of Pagan related violence is informers. > where there otherwise would e little or none This is really not believable. There is definitely a problem with informers manufacturing crime, but that should not be used to distract from what the Pagan MC really is, or prevent law enforcement from trying to protect the rest of us from their predations.
giantg2 5y ago
"So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable." Even if he wasn't performing the actions, he would still be committing crimes. That's how they charge a lot of people. Whether it's a conspiracy charge for having knowledge of (or help plan, or benefit from) the crimes before they happen, or if you're committing some lessor crime and one of your co-criminals kills someone so you're all charged with murder, etc.

alphabettsy 5y ago

> Informers manufacture crime where there otherwise would be little or none. This certainly can be true, but how often it is or isn’t certainly is not absolute as your statement, nor is it easily measurable. Like many other issues regarding law enforcement, this certainly requires greater scrutiny.

mushbino 5y ago

The liberty city seven is a good example of just how far informants can go. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_City_Seven https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_City_Seven There are actually a ton of examples now that I'm thinking about it. Canadian entrapment laws are much more lax and it happens pretty frequently up there as well

gadders 5y ago
There is also some debate about the role of FBI agents/informants in the Governor Whitmer kidnap case: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-trial.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/whitmer-kidnapping-tri...
- gadders 5y ago
  Also: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment-fake-terror-plots https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment...

boomboomsubban 5y ago

Did you copy and paste one of the comments from the linked story? edit while trying to figure this out their profile says the post was from yesterday but thie comments section says from an hour ago. Which makes me find it more likely the same person posted it both places.

pseingatl 5y ago
If it was my own comment.

vkou 5y ago

If I'm a cop, and I suggest to you that we should go rob a bank tomorrow, and you actually show up at Main and Third to do it, that's not entrapment. That's just you being a bank robber. If I threaten you into doing it, that's entrapment. If I don't threaten you, and we talk about doing it, but you don't actually take any meaningful steps towards doing it, you're in the clear. If we talk about doing it, and you go out to buy a gun, and a ski mask, and find a driver for the getaway car, it's also not entrapment. Because you're taking meaningful steps towards carrying out a conspiracy. Even if I'm the one selling you the gun. And the ski mask.

dylan604 5y ago
It's still 100% total bullshit. For law enforcement to make any attempt at convincing someone to commit a crime so that they could then come in and make the arrest to solve the crime is absolutley something that should not be allowed. If I hire a hitman to do a deed, I go to jail more than the hitman. When a LEO convinces someone to do a crime, they need to go to jail too.
- vkou 5y ago
  No, it's not. One of your responsibilities as a citizen is not getting involved in what you believe are serious criminal conspiracies. Another one is not getting involved in what actually are serious criminal conspiracies.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    People that commit these crimes "suggested" by undercover typically aren't the sharpest tool in the box. For LEOs to take advantage of that is reprehensible. One of LEOs responsibilities shouldn't be to see how many crimes they can get others to commit on their behest. It should be to catch those that commit crimes. We don't need more crime because LEO encourages it. That's just bassakwards logic.
    - mrslave 5y ago
      Jerry Drake Varnell needed the assistance of 3 FBI agents: one to seduce him online, another to pose as a bomb expert, and a third to teach him to drive a car.

changoplatanero 5y ago

There are ways to appear to commit a felony without actually doing it. For example, he could sell a large amount of drugs to another informant or he could rob a fake business set up by the fbi.

metaphor 5y ago
Do you seriously think these guys are like, "pick a crime and target, anything really so long as it's a legit felony...we'll give you a week to get creative, then when you're ready, we can all sing kumbaya while you demonstrate your loyalty to the group"? Color me unconvinced.
- alex_sf 5y ago
  Yes, actually. The expectation is you handle your own business.
- newsclues 5y ago
  In the past they have staged fake murders with photo evidence of their crimes to establish bona fides

vmception 5y ago

> So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. By being immune from such laws.

qwertox 5y ago
Yesterday I read a bit about the European Convention on Human Rights, where Article 2 – Right to life [0] left me thinking for a while. 2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary: a. in defence of any person from unlawful violence; b. in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; c. in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Conv...
- dmurray 5y ago
  It's a bit loose, isn't it? You can shoot someone if it's the only way to prevent them ruffling your hair, escaping from an arrest for shoplifting, or inciting a political protest. But the ECHR is meant to be a lowest common denominator: states are encouraged to have their own stricter prohibitions on human rights abuses.
monkeycantype 5y ago
There’s a case in Geelong Australia where a stabbing was caught on grainy cctv, people knew who the perpetrator was, but there was no hard evidence. The undercover police set up a fake gang that recruited the suspect, and performed fake burglaries on prepared targets as part of their attempt to get him to confess, including the tv show staple of the undercover police officer cell mate, none of which worked he never confessed to the crime to his fellow ‘gang members’ This is the case: https://amp.abc.net.au/article/9687114 https://amp.abc.net.au/article/9687114 It was said to be the states most expensive unsuccessful undercover operation, after the operation was shut down a million dollar reward was offered. I believe it was evidence that was then provided that lead to a conviction

Terry_Roll 5y ago

>To avoid infiltration, MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable. Sounds like many entities, politics, business, masons, military, police, nhs. Its the same thing over and over again, break a rule/law, say you didnt see something and watch the promotion's occur. As long as humans and money exist you will always have corruption but some happen to be on the right side of the law and others not.

cbsmith 5y ago

Mo Kane I presume?

pseingatl 5y ago
:)

tveita 5y ago

> MC's require prospects to commit felonies in the presence of members. > Informers manufacture crime where there otherwise would be little or none. These points are contradictory - crime is a required part of the initiation, but they also would not have done any crimes without the undercover agent tricking them? > He would never be a voice saying, "no, robbing a gas station is a bad idea." Why should he have to be? Do you think it would have helped? Maybe they should be sending in "undercover moms" instead to deradicalise gangs.

tomohawk 5y ago

This post seems to be suggesting that the main cause of Pagan related violence is informers. > where there otherwise would e little or none This is really not believable. There is definitely a problem with informers manufacturing crime, but that should not be used to distract from what the Pagan MC really is, or prevent law enforcement from trying to protect the rest of us from their predations.

giantg2 5y ago

"So the claim that the U/C broke no laws himself is laughable." Even if he wasn't performing the actions, he would still be committing crimes. That's how they charge a lot of people. Whether it's a conspiracy charge for having knowledge of (or help plan, or benefit from) the crimes before they happen, or if you're committing some lessor crime and one of your co-criminals kills someone so you're all charged with murder, etc.