To Catch a Predator

[ConHog]

Ummm...a plea bargain results in an actual conviction. No one with a lawyer is going to take a plea bargain if they were entrapped and could have the case thrown out.

Oh I don't know, my wife often reaches a plea bargain that results in the accused being found innocent..

[Gunny]

Let me try to make my point in a different way to some of you overly-opinionated fools. Two allegedly served in the military and one who has been a military dependent for years. I'm glad I never served under ANY of you. Not a one of you can divorce your personal/emotional opinions from accomplishing the mission.

I assume we are all eligible for jury duty. Suppose you sit on a jury of a case like this and the defense lawyer cries "entrapment". If he doesn't, no problem. But if he DOES, then those transcripts become available and I'm going to base my vote on those transcripts and the facts surrounding it. Not my f-ing personal problem with child molesters. If you think ANYONE in the US deserves less than due process, then you suck, and you claim to stand for something you don't understand.

The fact is, law enforcement luring people to commit a crime is entrapment, by definition. Even with all the caveats, I am going to look for "why not". Remember? Innocent until proven guilty? Or is that some misguided notion that's just some meaningless words on paper?

When I thought a young Marine had taken advantage of my then 15 years old daughter, it took my then-wife and 3 Oceanside cops to keep me from shooting the fucker dead. BUT ... I STILL understood the ramifications of what I would or could have done and was willing to accept the consequences for my actions.

Y'all are so self-sanctimonious. Must be nice to not have a conscience and be willing to live with the fact that the end justifies the means. At least in my case, I understood what I was going to do was against the law.

Y'all have have spent 3 pages trying to explain away something unlawful as lawful. Good job.

I'd hate to have ANY one of you except Intense on MY jury for even shoplifting.

[ConHog]

Let me try to make my point in a different way to some of you overly-opinionated fools. Two allegedly served in the military and one who has been a military dependent for years. I'm glad I never served under ANY of you. Not a one of you can divorce your personal/emotional opinions from accomplishing the mission.

I assume we are all eligible for jury duty. Suppose you sit on a jury of a case like this and the defense lawyer cries "entrapment". If he doesn't, no problem. But if he DOES, then those transcripts become available and I'm going to base my vote on those transcripts and the facts surrounding it. Not my f-ing personal problem with child molesters. If you think ANYONE in the US deserves less than due process, then you suck, and you claim to stand for something you don't understand.

The fact is, law enforcement luring people to commit a crime is entrapment, by definition. Even with all the caveats, I am going to look for "why not". Remember? Innocent until proven guilty? Or is that some misguided notion that's just some meaningless words on paper?

When I thought a young Marine had taken advantage of my then 15 years old daughter, it took my then-wife and 3 Oceanside cops to keep me from shooting the fucker dead. BUT ... I STILL understood the ramifications of what I would or could have done and was willing to accept the consequences for my actions.

Y'all are so self-sanctimonious. Must be nice to not have a conscience and be willing to live with the fact that the end justifies the means. At least in my case, I understood what I was going to do was against the law.

Y'all have have spent 3 pages trying to explain away something unlawful as lawful. Good job.

I'd hate to have ANY one of you except Intense on MY jury for even shoplifting.

Gunny I proved unequivocally that this show is not entrapment. It's not even really a debate.

The idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.

Government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving someone the opportunity to commit a crime is not the same as persuading them to commit that crime.

The person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before interaction with the government agents.


if you're on a jury and those three things can't be proven. Then it is NOT entrapment and your duty as a jury member is to not ignore then when proclaiming a verdict.

YOU are the one bound up in emotion here and unable to digest the legal issues.

[Missileman]

Let me try to make my point in a different way to some of you overly-opinionated fools. Two allegedly served in the military and one who has been a military dependent for years. I'm glad I never served under ANY of you. Not a one of you can divorce your personal/emotional opinions from accomplishing the mission.

I assume we are all eligible for jury duty. Suppose you sit on a jury of a case like this and the defense lawyer cries "entrapment". If he doesn't, no problem. But if he DOES, then those transcripts become available and I'm going to base my vote on those transcripts and the facts surrounding it. Not my f-ing personal problem with child molesters. If you think ANYONE in the US deserves less than due process, then you suck, and you claim to stand for something you don't understand.

The fact is, law enforcement luring people to commit a crime is entrapment, by definition. Even with all the caveats, I am going to look for "why not". Remember? Innocent until proven guilty? Or is that some misguided notion that's just some meaningless words on paper?

When I thought a young Marine had taken advantage of my then 15 years old daughter, it took my then-wife and 3 Oceanside cops to keep me from shooting the fucker dead. BUT ... I STILL understood the ramifications of what I would or could have done and was willing to accept the consequences for my actions.

Y'all are so self-sanctimonious. Must be nice to not have a conscience and be willing to live with the fact that the end justifies the means. At least in my case, I understood what I was going to do was against the law.

Y'all have have spent 3 pages trying to explain away something unlawful as lawful. Good job.

I'd hate to have ANY one of you except Intense on MY jury for even shoplifting.

Well thankfully, our legal system uses the LEGAL definition of entrapment and not the GUNNY definition, otherwise, we couldn't convict anyone because EVRYONE'S been entrapped.

And exactly where have any of us said ignore evidence and convict them anyways.

[Gunny]

Well thankfully, our legal system uses the LEGAL definition of entrapment and not the GUNNY definition, otherwise, we couldn't convict anyone because EVRYONE'S been entrapped.

And exactly where have any of us said ignore evidence and convict them anyways.

Thankfully, the "Gunny definition" IS the legal definition. It doen't include my personal biases.

Tell me, when you ready to "round up the boys to hang a rope from the tree cuz we suspect?"

[ConHog]

Thanfully, the "Gunny definition" IS the legal definition. It doen't include my personal biases.

Tell me, when you ready to "round up the boys to hang a rope from the tree cuz we suspect?"

LOL your definition is NOT the legal definition gunny.

[Missileman]

Thanfully, the "Gunny definition" IS the legal definition. It doen't include my personal biases.

No, it's not. It's been pointed out to you in several posts...even your own link PROVED you wrong.

Tell me, when you ready to "round up the boys to hang a rope from the tree cuz we suspect?"

Point to where exactly ANYONE in this thread, other than YOU, has suggested such a thing.

[Gunny]

LOL your definition is NOT the legal definition gunny.

Verbatim, junior. Want to try again? Or perhaps you have some investment in seeking out HitlerStix?

Find another thread. The adults are playing here.

[SassyLady]

Let me try to make my point in a different way to some of you overly-opinionated fools. Two allegedly served in the military and one who has been a military dependent for years. I'm glad I never served under ANY of you. Not a one of you can divorce your personal/emotional opinions from accomplishing the mission.

I assume we are all eligible for jury duty. Suppose you sit on a jury of a case like this and the defense lawyer cries "entrapment". If he doesn't, no problem. But if he DOES, then those transcripts become available and I'm going to base my vote on those transcripts and the facts surrounding it. Not my f-ing personal problem with child molesters. If you think ANYONE in the US deserves less than due process, then you suck, and you claim to stand for something you don't understand.

The fact is, law enforcement luring people to commit a crime is entrapment, by definition. Even with all the caveats, I am going to look for "why not". Remember? Innocent until proven guilty? Or is that some misguided notion that's just some meaningless words on paper?

When I thought a young Marine had taken advantage of my then 15 years old daughter, it took my then-wife and 3 Oceanside cops to keep me from shooting the fucker dead. BUT ... I STILL understood the ramifications of what I would or could have done and was willing to accept the consequences for my actions.

Y'all are so self-sanctimonious. Must be nice to not have a conscience and be willing to live with the fact that the end justifies the means. At least in my case, I understood what I was going to do was against the law.

Y'all have have spent 3 pages trying to explain away something unlawful as lawful. Good job.

I'd hate to have ANY one of you except Intense on MY jury for even shoplifting.

Gunny, I think I am the person you have referred to as a military dependent ... I am OK with you referring to me by my name, SassyLady...you don't have to veil who you are talking about.

I have absolutely no problem admitting that I am biased when it comes to child predators; I am a total bigot .... totally and irrevocably intolerant. And whether or not I am affiliated with the military in any way, I would never agree to serve on a jury where child molestation was the charge....simply because I cannot, nor do I want to, divorce myself from my personal experience with child molestation. Any good soldier knows that their own limitations can put the mission and their fellow soldiers at risk and should be courageous enough to step up and acknowledge their shortcomings rather than put the mission and fellow soldiers at risk. I can do that without hesitation.

In my opinion, there are plenty of other people in this world who have not been molested by a child predator that can serve on the jury and I will never have to be put in the position to see if I can, in fact, be unbiased.

I believe in due process, but I don't believe I have to be the person that proves/disproves it. I trust the system enough I guess to believe that if it is entrapment the courts will determine that it is and the accused walks. However, just because a jury says that it is entrapment does not mean the person was not a predator.

Some of us are willing to admit that we are imperfect and I, for one, will not be shamed into admitting to something else ... no matter what names you call us or allusions you make to being a member/dependent of the military.

[Gunny]

The first couple seasons were done without the cops...subsequent to that, they were coordinated with the police.

As for implying that Gunny was caught trying to pick up underage girls, that crosses a line that shouldn't be...an immediate retraction is warranted.

Yeah, his buddy from another board made the same accusation (see my OP). If you don't 100% agree with them, you're automatically 100% against them.

I'm aware the first couple of seasons were done without the police. I STILL thought Chris Hanson was a smarmy jerk, but I had no real issue with child predators being exposed.

Ummm...a plea bargain results in an actual conviction. No one with a lawyer is going to take a plea bargain if they were entrapped and could have the case thrown out.

I agree it results in a conviction. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say anyone busted for soliciting a minor is going to plea out as low under the radar as they possibly can. I haven't seen too many of them that look as if they could actually afford a lawyer, so they get a court appointed one. They work a deal with the overworked ADA, and they're done.

I'd be willing to bet most, if not all, would just as soon skip the publicity of an actual trial. The burden of proof for entrapment is on the defense. I doubt many court-appointed lawyers are going to go for that.

It would take someone who DID have money with a high-powered attorney. One gets as much justice in this country as one can afford.

[Gunny]

Gunny, I think I am the person you have referred to as a military dependent ... I am OK with you referring to me by my name, SassyLady...you don't have to veil who you are talking about.

I have absolutely no problem admitting that I am biased when it comes to child predators; I am a total bigot .... totally and irrevocably intolerant. And whether or not I am affiliated with the military in any way, I would never agree to serve on a jury where child molestation was the charge....simply because I cannot, nor do I want to, divorce myself from my personal experience with child molestation. Any good soldier knows that their own limitations can put the mission and their fellow soldiers at risk and should be courageous enough to step up and acknowledge their shortcomings rather than put the mission and fellow soldiers at risk. I can do that without hesitation.

In my opinion, there are plenty of other people in this world who have not been molested by a child predator that can serve on the jury and I will never have to be put in the position to see if I can, in fact, be unbiased.

I believe in due process, but I don't believe I have to be the person that proves/disproves it. I trust the system enough I guess to believe that if it is entrapment the courts will determine that it is and the accused walks. However, just because a jury says that it is entrapment does not mean the person was not a predator.

Some of us are willing to admit that we are imperfect and I, for one, will not be shamed into admitting to something else ... no matter what names you call us or allusions you make to being a member/dependent of the military.

Nice post.

[SassyLady]

Nice post.

Thank you for the acknowledgement Gunny, and thank you for reopening the thread.

[ConHog]

Gonna try this again. How about some feedback see if people agree or disagree that this show meets these standards ?


The idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.

Government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving someone the opportunity to commit a crime is not the same as persuading them to commit that crime.

The person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before interaction with the government agents.


1. Does a government agent give the suspect the idea of talking to an underage person about meeting for sex?




2. Did government agents then persuade the suspect to commit a crime?

3. Was the suspect not willing to commit a crime before a government agent talked them into it?

If not, no entrapement.

Oh, and that's AFTER you have proven that the show is acting as an agent of the government. Otherwise all bets are off.


oh, i wanted to add something else to. Sassy I respect what you've went through has shaped your opinion, but I firmly believe that IF this show is entrapment it should be ended regardless of the crime. That's why I think we should all discuss the actual legal definition of the term, so we can agree that personal feelings don't matter, this show does NOT fit the indention of police entrapment.

[LuvRPgrl]

I can end this responding to your first sentence.

Entrapment is entrapment. Law enforcement luring someone to commit a crime is entrapment.

Your assumption is they are "children's" chat rooms.

your assumption is they arent

[ConHog]

your assumption is they arent

How about lookin one post above this post and giving your opinion on whether this show fits the three elements that define entrapment. I'd be interested in your take.