On 01/26/10 18:28, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> However, the conclusion was that the error was in the initial court not
> allowing the defense to argue entrapment before the jury, not that it
> was actual entrapment. The end result was that the case was sent back to
> the initial jurisdiction, and I would have to search around more to see
> if that resulted in a new trial or just a dismissal. That case, by it
> self, set no legal wording for what entrapment actually is.

	Well, based on what I saw in the article, no formal definition has been
specified - it's often left to the juries/judges to decide what
constitutes entrapment.

-- 
"Graphic Artist seeks Boss with vision impairment."

Post a reply to this message