Entrapment?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
862
Location
Chicago
This kind of thing is absurd. What a waste of taxpayer money.

"Robin Garrison, an off-duty 42-year-old firefighter, was walking in Berliner Park in Columbus, Ohio, in May when he saw a woman sunbathing topless under a tree. He approached her and they started talking and getting comfortable, the woman smiling and resting her foot on his shoulder at one point.

Eventually, she asked to see Garrison's [censored]; he unzipped his pants and complied. Seconds later, undercover police officers pulled up in a van and arrested Garrison; he was later charged with public indecency, a misdemeanor, based on video footage taken by cops who were targeting men having sex or masturbating in the park. While topless sunbathing is legal in the city's parks, exposing more than that is against the law.

The case is just one of the more extreme examples of police stings aimed at luring people into committing crimes, a tactic that has resulted in hundreds of arrests, many convictions and plenty of controversy. Law enforcement officials say that such sting operations are an extremely effective means of lowering crime rates and stopping the criminally minded before they commit worse offenses. From early 2006 to the spring of 2007, there were 160 citations for public indecency in the city, according to an investigation by 10TV News. Among those who were caught in the stings: an Ohio State University doctor, government employees and a retired highway trooper.

But such operations veer dangerously close to entrapment, say lawyers, civil libertarians and defendants who've been caught in sting operations."

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4022717&page=1
 
No S content that I can see here...
whistle.gif


I did post the same: HERE
 
I am pretty much for law enforcement, sting operations, pro police, down the line. This seems to go too far though. Now do we really know though if she asked to see his ***** That seems to be the issue to me. If she did..then its entrapment.

I'd like to see ekpolk weigh in.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkC
I'd like to see topless sunbathing parks here, that's what I'd like to see!
Of course, that would require that the sun actually show itself.


You could call is a topless moisturizing park
banana2.gif
 
I guess the coffers were getting low, and they needed to write some more tickets. Will they next have officers standing with bunches of balloons hiding the speed limit signs? Portable fire hydrants to place near parked cars?

I liked this, further down in that article:
Another sting operation that made headlines involved police in El Paso, Texas, and U.S. Marshals sending out messages to wanted felons stating that they had "won" free Xbox 360 consoles and/or big-screen plasma TVs.
 
Quote:
I guess the coffers were getting low, and they needed to write some more tickets.


Well, I say that they do this to do something besides watch real crime just happen and not do anything about it. That is, you've got to expect them to justify their jobs somehow. REAL crime is mostly unstoppable. So, you set some booby traps ..and look busy.
 
The best solution is having visible police in uniform walking around they way it used to be done. This drive creeps away so that ordinary people would feel comfortable. Does putting bait everywhere to *attract* creeps make a park a better place to go for a walk? Sure, it harvests some of the marginal people, but it doesn't improve anyone's quality of life.
 
If she looked good enough to warrant more than a second glance, I'd have shown her anything whe wanted to see!

One thing did seem odd though,,Says she was SUNBATHING under a tree????

Bob
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
The best solution is having visible police in uniform walking around they way it used to be done. This drive creeps away so that ordinary people would feel comfortable. Does putting bait everywhere to *attract* creeps make a park a better place to go for a walk? Sure, it harvests some of the marginal people, but it doesn't improve anyone's quality of life.


It's not about improving quality of life. It's about meeting some easily measured objectives that will get the cops pulling the duty some brownie points and the rocket scientists that thought up the scam some serious points towards a promototion. Welcome to modern American management.
 
To me, the key here is that if there are no cops there, then there would have been no "crime." Flashing laws were meant to prevent people from seeing something they didn't want to see, not to prevent them from seeing something they asked to see.
 
Zactly. Let's go to a place where we spread lots of gasoline around ...then start asking for matches. We can then show how proactive we are at preventing fires.
 
Well given that I can be fined for the crime of leaving my car doors unlocked (because my actions may "cause" someone to turn the criminal corner and steal my stuff), then the topless copper should also be charged with assisting others to turn the same corner.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given that I can be fined for the crime of leaving my car doors unlocked (because my actions may "cause" someone to turn the criminal corner and steal my stuff),

That is really F'ed-up. Tell me you're joking.
 
It's illegal (not really enforced) to give money to panhandler/beggars in Memphis. I wouldn't be surprised if cops start dressing up like vagabonds.
 
Originally Posted By: Cogito
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given that I can be fined for the crime of leaving my car doors unlocked (because my actions may "cause" someone to turn the criminal corner and steal my stuff),

That is really F'ed-up. Tell me you're joking.


http://police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/106778/brochure_general_crime_prevention.pdf

Quote:
When you leave your car unattended, even for short periods, close all windows, remove the key from the
ignition and lock all doors. Remember, it’s an offence
under the Australian Road Rules to leave your car
unlocked;
 
I'm of the opinion that people who play the middle can in many ways be more hazardous to a modern society than those outside of the standard deviation. Their position actually provides them with a unique opportunity; they are capable of enabling the true criminals which are already in existence as well as streamlining the development of those who will also become... centered (balanced seems like the wrong word) and later true criminals themselves unless those in question are acutely aware of their position and direct themselves accordingly: a true gem (or perhaps pearl) in and of itself, though even so much more so if they are able to fix their position between the pillars with a benevolent conviction. Most people have at least some semblance of a fully dual capacity and all are chameleons; the goose and the gander more simply are than not because they are or aren't enabled (define that however you please) to be such: people always choose the path of greatest perceived pleasure (I'll spare you my musings on masochism). In counterpoint, assuming rigid stage theories are [censored], you might also argue the category could function as a transitional endowment for the penitent. They do say once you go black (hearted... of course
blush.gif
) you never go back, however... and it's very hard for a grouch like me to shake the idea even as much as one might want it to be false: even in the wake of those blessed exceptions. People who can't assess risk accurately often concentrate their search for capacity instead (problematic for at least one reason I've already stated), which is why the majority of the populace subsides on paranoia (in the common sense of the word). I think I'll reserve the disposal of my adjective bomb here for a time when I'm feeling... hmmm, bitter.
grin2.gif


When people start accusing the police of being aggressively sanctimonious (or engaging in entrapment): take a look around. The police... didn't just appear out of thin air. To whatever degree the status quo is any determinant, they are actually serving the public (as in popular) interest (which I think is particularly interesting given my opening dialogue). The people who make it solidly back into good graces are truly lucky in my opinion, if not because of their own nature, then for the overt lack of critical resources and infrastructure, much less the interpersonal environment which they navigate. A DMZ does have a useful function, and I think modern societies should and inevitably will evolve them whether a cluster of reactive citizens ruled by their own fears approve or even have the capacity and vulnerability to understand the process or not. Attempting to stop it from an anthropocentric perspective (I hear laughing) only displaces the demand. We do appear (in the vaguest conception) to have some means by which to speed up and/or direct the process however. Slow and steady wins the race? (Just figured I'm supposed to say something like that here... probably should anyway.) In the most bizarre of contradictions, my view of the world is that life in the largest sense is driven to divide, and while unity is most certainly not divine, it is surely miraculous. Growth will demand efficiency, and there are only so many ways to create it. In so very many respects the system is self-correcting; even the impossibly small corner to which I have been exposed is all quite astounding really (curious if the rest is just as peachy).

Middle way indeed... perhaps I just watch too many movies.
21.gif

Rant cramp: time for a break. Now, who can guess what my favorite flower is?
12.gif


Quote:
To me, the key here is that if there are no cops there, then there would have been no "crime."

Quote:
Well, I say that they do this to do something besides watch real crime just happen and not do anything about it. That is, you've got to expect them to justify their jobs somehow. REAL crime is mostly unstoppable.
Zactly.
56.gif
 
Quote:
even the impossibly small corner to which I have been exposed


Well, Julian, if your "exposure" happens to be in some impossibly small corner of a topless sunbathing friendly park, just be careful that you're not being invited to provide purpose at your expense; as enlightening as the experience may be.
grin2.gif
 
This is the definition of entrapment in my state:

5-2-209. Entrapment.
(a) It is an affirmative defense that the defendant was entrapped into committing an offense.

(b) (1) Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement officer or any person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement officer induces the commission of an offense by using persuasion or other means likely to cause a normally law-abiding person to commit the offense.

(2) Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.

History. Acts 1975, No. 280, § 209; A.S.A. 1947, § 41-209.


Close call I think, could go either way.
 
Would a naked woman asking a man to show his [censored] have any persuasive effect on that man?

Leaving a cellphone on a bench, vs. asking someone to take the cellphone lying on a bench....

I'd say it's pretty clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top