But, he did not communicate with a minor for anything, because there never was a minor involved.
Hayzoos Kristo, this is silly.
Yeah, didn't happen.
this raises a good question
I've always wondered why the police could use a sting to entice someone to commit a crime and then arrest them for it
seems to me it should work the other way as well
'intent' doesn't know you're wearing a badge, and the fact that you have one doesn't make you a saint
Participating in a gun buy back program because you think criminals have too many guns is like having yourself castrated because you think your neighbor has too many kids
"I'm only myself when I have a guitar in my hands." - George Harrison
For me the big thing here is the person posing as a minor is not connected with law enforcement in any way. Is that what we need, people running around the internet trying to trap others in illegal activity?
343 - Never Forget
Its better to be Pavlov's dog than Schrodinger's cat
There are three types of mistakes; Those you learn from, those you suffer from, and those you don't survive.
|safe & sound|
People get arrested and criminally charged all of the time for these things because the crime is the intent as well as the act.
Hire a hitman that’s really an undercover cop and you get charged with solicitation of murder.
Place a fake bomb that was provided by a Fed pretending to be a fellow terrorist, and you’re charged with committing terrorism.
Fake prostitutes, fake drug dealers, fake fences, and all other sorts of fakes get people charged criminally every day. I suppose they figure that somebody who’s willing to engage with a fake is also engaging with others who are not.
What about people here that have made threats against government officials that resulted in you hearing from the Feds? Same premise.
I don’t have a problem with people devoting time to these things, but I do think this particular case is a bit of BS. 16 is the age of consent in several states, and is close enough to “legal” to not flip my interested meter.
I would be more interested in those going after younger targets.
|Little ray |
You'll spend two weeks in your first year law school criminal law class on mistake of fact and mistake of law, another three weeks on intent, and then two weeks on attempt liability, so this is a more complicated topic than it might appear to be.
The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
I was thinking the same thing. He's clearly more than a witness to a crime or a crime victim.
It would seem at some point this guy has to show up and testify to his "evidence" and get cross checked, and it seems the defense would be all over his background and slaughter him at any tiny thing he's done that points to not trusting him. He might even get sued if he did something out of the ordinary with the evidence. (and he should).
I have an old X-Band radar unit and a camera, but I don't go out and issue photo traffic citations. It just wouldn't work.
|Conservative Behind |
This is Para's point, I believe. What about someone who decides to rob a store, but then decides against it at the last minute? Is he still guilty of robbery?
I found what you said riveting.
Or in this case, what if the building turns out to not even be a store.
|safe & sound|
I get that. I know in many of these stings the person charged actually shows up in person.
Let’s say somebody decides to talk dirty, ask for nude photos, or sends nude photos to a person they believe to be a minor. In your robbery example they have the same choice. They can stop before talking and/or sending photos.
What if in your robbery example they demand the money, get the money, but then change their mind. They don’t even touch it, but will still face a number of criminal charges.
Chris Hansen has been doing To Catch A Predator shows for many years. I know at some point there were some concerns involving entrapment.
Remember Anthony Weiner
State statutes vary from state to state, ranging from misdemeanor to felony.
There's information within this link that has federal statutes.
I know a little about a lot of things, but I don't know everything. I'm in the minority these days.
|Ice age heat wave, |
NRA Life Member
Steak: Rare. Coffee: Black. Scotch: Neat.
|safe & sound|
Any of you guys OK with the police hiring real 13 year old girls to talk dirty to old men in order to make the charges really legitimate?
I am wondering about the motives of the "Concerned Citizen". I always hated kids who had this personality dynamic.
I think the UCMJ has it right:
"Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense."
NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught"
I'm no expert at detective work, but it seems like there's enough real crime and human trafficking to go after and make arrests, without having to make-up fake events.
Maybe the experts can correct me if I'm wrong.
This (PC Section 664) is what’s used to prosecute cases like this. Offenders need to commit an “Overt Act” and it goes way beyond just thinking about committing the actual offense. The same laws and tactics are used to investigate such things as soliciting to commit murder. Just because the “hitman” who meets up with the person proposing the “contract” is really an undercover police officer who’d never consider committing murder poses as one, doesn’t mean a crime hasn’t been committed or an entrapment defense would be effective.
A few years back, I was at a homicide conference at the FBI HQ in Quantico. An sex crimes investigator did a live, on-line demonstration on how quickly predators would jump on the bait in these kinds of stings. Within ten minutes, one of these guys was trying to set something up the “12 year old girl” the UC represented himself as. Note that kids ARE frequently victimized by these offenders. They’re talked into posing naked on-line and the pics or videos are then traded among pedophiles, worldwide. It’s not uncommon for many to meet expecting a non sexual encounter, but it turns into something else.
I’ve arrested and charged offenders with many crimes that never went beyond the “Attempt” stage and the prosecutions were successful. The intent was there, the overt acts were committed, and the only thing missing was a “successful” conclusion to the crime. Would you prefer that officers allow a group of armed bank robbers to commit the crime, terrorizing innocent victims as well as exposing them to death or great bodily injury, or stopping them as they drove to the location with masks, guns, duct tape, etc..., and (having obtained corroborating admissions) charge them with Attempted Robbery and Conspiracy to Commit Robbery instead?
"I'm not fluent in the language of violence, but I know enough to get around in places where it's spoken."
If I go to buy weed and a guy sells me oregano instead can I be charged with buying drugs? Can he be charged with selling drugs?
|Step by step walk the thousand mile road|
The difference is ol' Carlos Dangerous communicated to a female who actually was 15 years old.
I'm with Para... if no minor was involved, how can the charge of communication with a minor stand?
No minor is no minor. I'd make the case the defendant knew all along there wasn't a minor involved and that any indication a minor was involved was simply furtherance of two adults engaging in a sexual fantasy.
A 50 year old woman can claim she's under 15, but if you have sex with her have you committed statutory rape?
Nice is overrated
"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government."
Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
Dang sure is, especially if you have a law degree.
This seems like vigilante type stuff to me...
I lost all my weapons in a boating, umm, accident.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4 5|