RE: FBI ran website sharing thousands of child porn images
January 23, 2016 at 9:05 pm
(This post was last modified: January 23, 2016 at 9:18 pm by Sterben.)
(January 23, 2016 at 11:15 am)Divinity Wrote:(January 23, 2016 at 1:45 am)Sterben Wrote: At the end of the day what they did was entrapment, even if it was to catch sick fucks, it's still illegal for them to use such a tacit. The courts will have a major issue on how the evidence was gathered and most likely all charges will dropped against the who were caught.
No, it's not entrapment. Not sure why this is such a hard concept to understand. If any charges are dropped, it'd be for an entirely different reason. But the entrapment defense would not work here.
Entrapment requires coercsion or persuasion. They were clearly willing and ready to commit the crime. So a decent defense attorney wouldn't use the entrapment defense, unless they wanted a good laugh from the judge and prosecution on their lack of understanding of entrapment.
How is it not entrapment? The way I see it is this, Jim the garbage man is cruising down-town looking for a prostitute. He see's one he likes and approaches, just for sake of argument here; the F.B.I is watching that street and see's Jim talking to her and picks her up to take for a ride. They would have to catch Jim in the act of soliciting sexual services, they can't just go on the basis that he was there and picked someone up for sex and arrest him three or four days later for the crime of soliciting sexual services right?
Full Definition of entrapment
1
a : the action or process of entrapping b : the condition of being entrapped
2
: the action of luring an individual into committing a crime in order to prosecute the person for it
By leaving the site open they have already broken the law themselves, I'm not directly attacking there actions, they were quite Nobel. It was there execution of the operation which is in question in here.
