|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 01/27/10 13:11, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> You only consider two cases: Either the cop identifies himself *and*
>> incites someone to commit a crime, or neither.
>>
>> That was not the question. The question was if a cop incites someone
>> to commit a crime but does not identify himself as a police officer.
>
> If the person is given no choice in committing the crime, then it's
> entrapment. If the cop says to the second party "kill that guy or I kill
> you" and then arrests the second party, that's entrapment. If the second
> party has a reasonable chance of declining to participate, then it's not.
I think that still isn't covering all the angles Warp is talking about.
What if it's an undercover cop who convinces (but doesn't coerce)
someone to commit a crime?
I'd call that entrapment, as well. The usual criterion is "Would the
person have been predisposed to commit the crime had the cops not
approached him about it?"
--
"Graphic Artist seeks Boss with vision impairment."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |