Entrapment?

A Can of Man

A Can of Man

Je suis aware
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6b1_1221522838

Take a look at that. It's cops using an unlocked bike to arrest potential bike thieves but seriously... if you leave a bike like that in the middle of a college campus I'm sure you'll have pretty interesting results as well.
I don't think this was a very good operation at all and would in fact unnecessarily give people who merely made a bad choice at the last minute a criminal record.
 
I can't see this as entrapment. No more than the bait cars being used by police around the world to catch car thieves.

Even though it is stupid to leave valuables unsecured, there is no moral (or I think legal) obligation for honest persons to have to secure every possible item of any value from thieves. I think that it is great, if every time a thief looks at someone else's property, they have that nagging doubt, "is this a trap,... is it worth the risk?".
Luckily where I live most items are relatively safe. I have never seen a lock in a bike in my town.
 
I'm not sure what I think about this. It's good to catch a thief, but then again this is like creating crime for the sake of fighting crime. A real gray area.
 
Entrapment is defined as causing a person to commit a criminal act by convincing or cohercing them to commit the act which they would not otherwise commit.

Bait bikes, bait cars etc. are not entrapment in that there is no interaction between the police and the subject prior to the crime.

In prostitution/narcotics stings and other undercover operations as long as the officer does not coherce to subject it's not entrapment. Asking "Yo you got a couple rocks?" is not entrapment provided that the officer does not further convince the subject to go and find the rocks. Nor is telling a criminal you are not law enforcement entrapment.
 
They do this to make up their arrest quota... not to prevent crime. Without crime they wouldn't have a job, so they must justify their existence.
I could tell you a hell of a lot more about this but I'm going to bed in a minute. Besides, I don't want to be seen as an anarchist. lol.
 
I don't know if it's true or not whether police in certain jurisdictions have quotas. However it doesn't appear to me to have anything at all to do with proactive Policing.

I can't possibly see how this could be considered as entrapment regardless of the legal interpretation of the law. All the Police were doing was giving people a chance to show whether they were honest or not. The one's shown in the clip failed the test.

I would hate having to lock everything up every time I wasn't using it.

Personally I would like to see a lot more of this type of policing, give the parasites of the community something to worry about.
 
In England, arrest quota's are simple:

Arrest as many people as said quota, no matter what for. After that, if they go to your house and the burglar is there, it has happened where they have let the burglar go because they'd filled the quota's.
 
Insomniac said:
In England, arrest quota's are simple:

Arrest as many people as said quota, no matter what for. After that, if they go to your house and the burglar is there, it has happened where they have let the burglar go because they'd filled the quota's.
Click to expand...
Could you please supply a source for this information, I find it very hard to believe, unless there were some other reason, not stated.
 
No source, i think it was in a newspaper but it was a couple months ago now...

But then, this is the northwest... nothing surprises me anymore.
 
chrischance said:
They do this to make up their arrest quota... not to prevent crime. Without crime they wouldn't have a job, so they must justify their existence.
I could tell you a hell of a lot more about this but I'm going to bed in a minute. Besides, I don't want to be seen as an anarchist. lol.
Click to expand...

Just one question, did the police actually force them to steal the bike?

At no point did any of these people have to take the bike they could have just walked on by and avoided arrest completely.
 
Hahahahaha, quota, people have no idea what they are talking about when they talk crap about cops.
Not entrapment with the bikes. If an undercover cop walked up to a thief and said, go steal that bike it's not secured and the idiot went and stole it, than that would probably be entrapment.
 
Ahh... okay.
Anyways thanks for clearing up the definition of entrapment.
I still think they ought to do this stuff in a university or where college kids hang out. After all, bike theft is more serious in those neck of the woods and you'll have interesting people getting cuffed.
 
Aiki, remember one thing:

You're american. We're english.


EVERYTHING is different over here, pretty much. Our only similarity is language.
 
Now see I thought that the English and Americans were a people seperated by a common language.
 
Insomniac said:
Aiki, remember one thing:

You're american. We're english.

EVERYTHING is different over here, pretty much. Our only similarity is language.
Click to expand...
I think you'll find you are wrong.

Nothing is clear cut in Law either in the US or Britain, however "Butterworth's Law" states that to claim entrapment, the accused must demonstrate incitement or permission.

There is no incitement in this case, no one incited him to steal the bike, yes,.... they allowed him to, but that is not vaguely the same, (to let, suffer or allow) is permissible. But to "permit" is not because it implies that permission was given. (legal definition of permission)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top