Originally posted by FMFThis has already been addressed. Please read the thread prior to posting because your text not only regurgitates an argument already made but makes a rather glaring assumption, that being that for entrapment to have occurred a criminal element must be present. It seems that despite your alleged rudimentary grasp of language that this is not necessarily the case.
As all of us with a rudimentary grasp of the language know, the word "entrapment" means "Of law enforcement, the act of leading or guiding a suspect into committing a criminal act the suspect otherwise would not have committed" [from the same online dictionary as you used for "legitimate"].
So - seeing as Sam Allardyce did not commit a "criminal act" and the ...[text shortened]... story broke any law or that anything that one could legitimately call "entrapment" had happened.
Simple Definition of entrapment
: the act of entrapping someone or something or the condition of being entrapped
: the illegal act of tricking someone into committing a crime so that the person you have tricked can be arrested
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrapment
You will please note that there are two definitions, one with a legal basis and one without. I therefore reject your text on the basis that a legal aspect must be present in order for someone to be the victim of entrapment. This is now the second time I have stated this and I will not do so again. Please try to be less self assuming with regard to your semantic arguments and more creative in your questioning or at very least make sure you have read the previous arguments because its rather tedious to respond to arguments that have been addressed elsewhere.
30 Sep 16
Originally posted by lemon limeThis is my point exactly. An officer leaves keys in the ignition, in an abandoned and unlocked vehicle. Surely that is putting temptation someones way and I have a very difficult time with the ethics of such a stance, its inviting someone to commit a crime.
I suppose he could claim it was not his intention to get caught committing a crime.
He wouldn't know if the doors were unlocked or not unless he tries opening one. If he gets into the car he could claim he was mistaken, and thought it was his car. But that would only work if he actually did own a nearly identical car and it was parked somewhere nearby. ...[text shortened]... no other valuables to steal, means the bait car can be used multiple times without being damaged
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo if you're not talking about "entrapment" in the sense of the legal concept of "entrapment", then why are you talking legalistically about whether he has a "legitimate case for the defence of entrapment", as you yourself put it, and why have you been mentioning crimes and "entrapment" in the legal sense as it pertains to criminal activity and the behaviour of the police? Surely "the defence of entrapment" is only something that occurs in a criminal case where there is a question about police methods?
This has already been addressed. Please read the thread prior to posting because your text not only regurgitates an argument already made but makes a rather glaring assumption, that being that for entrapment to have occurred a criminal element must be present. It seems that despite your alleged rudimentary grasp of language that this is not necessari ...[text shortened]... arguments because its rather tedious to respond to arguments that have been addressed elsewhere.
30 Sep 16
Originally posted by FMFI have addressed the point, a crime does not need to have been committed in order for entrapment to have occurred. I will not do so again. Big Sam made the claim that he was the victim of entrapment, I want to understand if that claim is valid, legitimate, justifiable, reasonable, true etc etc
So if you're not talking about "entrapment" in the sense of the legal concept of "entrapment", then why are you talking legalistically about whether he has a "legitimate case for the defence of entrapment", as you yourself put it, and why have you been mentioning crimes and "entrapment" in the legal sense as it pertains to criminal activity and the behaviour of ...[text shortened]... is only something that occurs in a criminal case where there is a question about police methods?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOf course it isn't a valid or legitimate claim seeing as "the defence of entrapment", as you put it, only applies to criminal cases.
I have addressed the point, a crime does not need to have been committed in order for entrapment to have occurred. I will not do so again. Big Sam made the claim that he was the victim of entrapment, I want to understand if that claim is valid, legitimate, justifiable, reasonable, true etc etc
30 Sep 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt is inviting a criminal to commit a crime, not an honest person.
This is my point exactly. An officer leaves keys in the ignition, in an abandoned and unlocked vehicle. Surely that is putting temptation someones way and I have a very difficult time with the ethics of such a stance, its inviting someone to commit a crime.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeIts scurrilously underhanded. Imagine you are a drug addict and you are out and about on your way to Chapel to pray for strength to resist your yearnings for narcotics. As you walk down the street your craving gnawing at you like an incurable toothache you chance upon an abandoned car with the keys dangling in the ignition like wind chimes on a garden wall, beckoning you forward with their harmonious tones. You try to fight the urge but they are too strong and overcome you. Next thing you know you are in the back of a police vehicle, handcuffed and on your way to the correctional centre and 4 days of cold turkey followed by five years incarceration. You had no intention of stealing a vehicle that day but temptation was put in your way?
It is inviting a criminal to commit a crime, not an honest person.
30 Sep 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOne less JW on the streets.
Its scurrilously underhanded. Imagine you are a drug addict and you are out and about on your way to Chapel to pray for strength to resist your yearnings for narcotics. As you walk down the street your craving gnawing at you like an incurable toothache you chance upon an abandoned car with the keys dangling in the ignition like wind chimes on a gar ...[text shortened]... eration. You had no intention of stealing a vehicle that day but temptation was put in your way?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116950
30 Sep 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDo you see Sam Allardyce as a victim or an exposed self-serving rule-breaker in all this?
Its scurrilously underhanded. Imagine you are a drug addict and you are out and about on your way to Chapel to pray for strength to resist your yearnings for narcotics. As you walk down the street your craving gnawing at you like an incurable toothache you chance upon an abandoned car with the keys dangling in the ignition like wind chimes on a gar ...[text shortened]... eration. You had no intention of stealing a vehicle that day but temptation was put in your way?