To Catch A Predator

V

Venison_Jerkey32

New member
While watching the show "To Catch a Predator" on MSNBC I started to think about whether or not the suspects were actually guilty of soliciting sex from a minor, or if they had just gotten really lucky.

Now for the question:

A)Say after being arrested, the suspects are to be charged with the crime of "soliciting sex of a minor," now, the suspect didn't actually do this because the decoys were all adults posing as minors. So is he innocent?

Expanding on this idea
B) If a minor buys "alcohol" but it is actually juice or water, did he break the law?

C) If a drug dealer is selling sweet n low instead of real drugs, is he guilty of anything? (maybe of false advertising:rolleyes:)

D) if the common statement "ignorance is no excuse" means that intent doesn't matter as long as you break the law... does it also mean intent doesn't matter as long as you Don't break the law

E) are most laws worded to say "murder or intent to murder," "soliciting or intent to solicit," "selling drugs or intent of selling drugs" rendering this entire question pointless?
 
Say after being arrested, the suspects are to be charged with the crime of "soliciting sex of a minor," now, the suspect didn't actually do this because the decoys were all adults posing as minors. So is he innocent?
Click to expand...

They didn't know they were talking to decoys, so they are pieces of poop just the same.

Now, what exactly does this have to do with guns or gun rights?
 
Say after being arrested, the suspects are to be charged with the crime of "soliciting sex of a minor," now, the suspect didn't actually do this because the decoys were all adults posing as minors. So is he innocent?
Click to expand...

Innocent? Hardly! :mad:
You still go to jail. Most decoys will state that they are 16, 17, 17 and 1/2 years, or some other non-legal age. For example, if a adult is flirting online with someone who claims their age is only 15 and then agrees to meet that person for sexual purposes, then authorities can show that his intent was to have sexual activity with a minor.

Some laws have an intent clause, others do not. But courts have held that if you should reasonably know that the activity(s) you are trying to engage in are illegal, then you intended to commit the crime.

For instance, you brace some guy outside a bar and try to buy a gun "off the record". He takes you to his car, produces a pistol that, in the dark, looks like a 1911 and says "$125 bucks". You hand him the money and after he disappears, you find it's a Japanese non-firing replica gun. Who broke the law? The seller sold you a legal product (at way over it's fair value) and you accepted. But you solicited an unlawful sale of a firearm and those three guys coming towards you are cops to arrest you for soliciting a crime. Oops.
 
Well I posted this in the legal and Political section because it wasn't firearms related, if threads in L&P are supposed to be firearms related my bad, but I don't see anything in the stickys or otherwise.

I'm not saying the suspects are good people or that they don't deserve to go to jail, I'm simply asking if soliciting sex from an adult posing as a minor is the same as soliciting from a minor.

From what i've read about TCaP, many of the suspects end up with no charges which leads me to believe the men either have very good lawyers or they aren't really breaking the law.
 
The reason some end up not being charged is that the decoys didn't get sufficient evidence that the perp was going to do anything illegal. Or that the documented contacts indicate the decoy may have suggested the meeting or further involvement (if I can't see you soon it'll be like the end of the world to me!).

By the way, what the heck is TCaP?
 
17 and 1/2 years
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's right but having a decoy say they're 17-1/2 is like an ATF agent trying to sell a shotgun with a 17-1/2" barrel. It's illegal but they should be spending their time going after the REAL bad guys (the ones going after actual LITTLE kids)
 
When a guy solicits an undercover cop, she has no intention of having sex, but he is still guilty of trying to buy some. These guys trying to solicit sex from a minor are the same. They intended to do the act and tried. Doesn't matter the bait person was an adult.

A person selling and/or buying fake drugs is still guilty of selling or buying real drugs. If a guy robs a store with a fake gun, he still gets charged with armed robbery because everyone else thought it was real. Intent makes you just as guilty as actually doing the act.
 
There are two different standards for entrapment and most states use the squishy one. The harder standard is federal, I think, and looks for "outrageous conduct" on the part of the police, or something like that. The looser standard says that if a person's "criminal nature" would have lead them to do something similar without the cop's help, then the cop conduct does not even need to be looked into much.

Neither one gets many people off the hook. It's a loser defense for rich guys with good lawyers who will try anything to beat the charge.
 
I have seen the show several times and have never seen them pose as 17 year olds. I have always seen them posing as 13-15 year olds... which isn't even close to being "ok". Not to mention the age of consent is 16 in many states, so they probably don't bother with ages higher than 15.

Also notice they try to get the guy to bring items that will incriminate him like booze and condoms. They also attempt to make the sex and booze the bad guy's idea... otherwise the entrapment defense might work. If the guy talks to the "minor" for hours and hours about innocent things and is then reluctant to talk about sexual topics and avoids the topic altogether, he could very well argue he had no intention of having sex, but instead really liked her and wanted to meet her. Luckily this is never the case... the scumbags are always anxious to talk about sex and always come prepared. Throw them in prison!
 
You still go to jail. Most decoys will state that they are 16, 17, 17 and 1/2 years, or some other non-legal age.
Click to expand...

Actually, here in Colorado, it is legal if the person is between 11 and 18 and the younger person is within 4 years, but not under the age of 11.

Legal consent is 16 here in Colorado and it is legal for anyone within 10 years elder to be involved with them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not into young people. Too immature for me. I'm 27, prefer them at least 24.

But, it is just some other laws I went through when hearing about the sex crimes here in Colorado and wanting more info.
 
"If a drug dealer is selling sweet n low instead of real drugs, is he guilty of anything? (maybe of false advertising)"


Actually, there is a specific law against selling "look-alike" substances such as oregano, powdered sugar, and drawing paper with hi-lighter on it.
 
Stings have been going on for years and they're legal as long as you are "baiting" them by attempting to lead them into criminal activity.

If you are simply providing an opportunity to violate the law and the guy willingly gets involved, then that has been judged as being legal in many court precedents.

Of course, this may vary from state to state. But, it's my understanding that this is legal in most states. The key thing is to not bait the guy into doing crime.

Besides, the whole sex thing is way overrated. Our society seems to worship sex. Most of the time, it's more trouble than it's worth.
 
Stings have been going on for years and they're legal as long as you are "baiting" them by attempting to lead them into criminal activity.
Click to expand...

I think you meant as long as you aren't "baiting" them...

For instance, an undercover cop in a bar talking to a patron says "man, right now what I'd love is a couple of hot chicks and some blow to forget my troubles". If the patron suggests that he can obtain the cocaine (and maybe the women) and does so, that's not "entrapment". The patron could have ignored the suggestion or done any number of other things besides offer to break the law.

On the other hand, the same situation the undercover cop says, "man, right now what I'd love is a couple of hot babes and some blow to forget my troubles. If you can set that up, it'll be worth $400 to ya." This is entrapment as the cop has offered to pay him to break the law and $400 might entice him to take a risk he would not normally take.
 
Unless they prove the guy has a history of pimping and selling blow for a combo deal of $600... then their $400 offer wasn't exactly entrapment.

Do it to a guy who is completely broke, doesn't have a record, but lives in the ghetto and therefore knows some people... then the entrapment defense might fly.

But yeah, overall your point is correct, I'm just playing along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top