Entrapment by Government Agents - Essay Example

Entrapment by Government Agencies Entrapment by Government Agencies Do you think that in this case, "the Government overstepped the line between setting a trap for the unwary innocent and the unwary criminal? Why or why not? Yes, one thinks that “the Government has overstepped the line between setting a trap for the ‘unwary innocent’ and the ‘unwary criminal”. As can be seen in the case the government for two and a half years has been setting up the trap for Jacobson. Jacobson may not even have pursued the idea of joining those fake organizations if they have not sounded so encouraging in their letters.

In the first place, when Jacobson ordered the “Bare Boys I” and “Bare Boys II”, he was not aware that there were pictures of nude young boys. Furthermore, at the time that he purchased these magazines, child pornography was not yet considered illegal; therefore, he cannot be accused of such crime. Throughout the two and a half years, the government has been pestering Jacobson, to the point of almost forcing him to commit a crime. The fictitious organizations that have been sending him mails and surveys seem to be wanting to pin him down.

The government was trying to lure him to commit the crime by informing him that censorship was infringing on his rights and sexual freedom. Jacobson is an innocent victim of entrapment by the government. The information about pornography and other illicit sexual activities were being fed to Jacobson, flaunted right into his mail box. The government did not give him a choice but to participate in the surveys and be a member of the phony organizations. Instead of trying to trap him, the government should have gone after the real offenders, those who do not need any persuasion from them to commit the crime. 2. How did the U.S. Supreme Court define entrapment in this case?

Do you agree with the definition? Why or why not? The Supreme Court defined entrapment in this case by stating that “if the defendant before contact with law enforcement officers or their agents did not have any intent or disposition to commit the crime charged and was induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit the crime, then he was entrapped” (What constitutes entrapment by government agents?, 1992). Yes, one agrees with the definition of the Supreme Court.

One believes that to prove that there is entrapment, two factors must be considered which was captured in the definition of the Supreme Court. The first is that the defendant was induced by the government to commit the crime. The second factor is the matter of whether the defendant is predisposed to commit the crime, given the fact that he was induced inappropriately to commit the crime. ReferencesWhat constitutes entrapment by government agents?, 503 U.S. 540 (U.S. Supreme Court April 6, 1992).