Well, Kellimus, I'm glad to say I agree with you for once. If the cop truly lied like that, then that's definitely a funk on their part. I still don't think it's entrapment, but to me that appears to be a violation of the "due process" clause of the fourteenth amendment, since they screwed up the "due process" required to give you a citation.
So lemme get this straight...
You support Authority not doing their job correctly and breaking laws? That's what you've said:
since they screwed up the "due process" required to give you a citation.
How is the "due process" for Authority screwing up and not following STATE LAWS, to cite an innocent civilian just doing their job???? That's absolutely ludicrous logic if you ask me. The 'due process' for Authority for screwing up, giving a citation to a civilian through illegal means and lying, should be to take the policeman off the force for breaking the laws HE is supposed to 'uphold'.
And how do you not understand that its Entrapment?
Utah State Law has passed laws that allow Police to:
A) Aid and abed a minor to break the law with no repercussions to the minor, due to the fact that they work for the state. No citation, no NOTHING for a Minor in Possession of Tobacco, no citation or anything for them breaking the law. Because they 'work for the state'
B) Superceed Federal Laws that prohibit the use of individuals in use of Commerce.
C) Carry a MINOR passenger in their undercover squad car, to various private property and private stores for use in illicit and illegal activity.
Now, the law also states that if a Minor who is working for the state in these sting-operations is asked to provide an ID at the time of the crime, BY LAW, they have to.
Now this is where its Entrapment:
Underage Minor Working For the State (UMWFS): "Can I get a pack of Marlboro Lights?
Clerk: "Sure." *gets pack* "Do you have your ID with you?"
UMWFS: *Shakes head* "Nope"
Clerk: *Hesitates* "Is there anyone you're with that is over 18 and has an ID I could see?"
UMWFS: *Shakes head again*
Clerk: *Hesistates even more* "I'm not supposed to sell you this without an ID....But I've been in your position before" *Sells the tobacco to the UMWFS, UMWFS leaves and gets in back of car. Clerk watches the undercover cop walk into the store with citations*
Undercover: *Puts hand on hip* "I'm officer Crocket from Tremonton Sherrifs Department, do you know"
Clerk: *Nods head* "I know who you are and you don't need to present yourself"
Undercover: *Ignoring the clerk, proceeds* "Is there any reason why you didn't ask her for ID?"
Clerk: "But officer, I did ask her for ID and she didn't have one. I know what I did was against company policy and against the law for selling without an ID"
Undercover: "Well, you're being cited for selling tobacco to a minor"Notice the Bolded part. "Well, you're being cited for selling tobacco to a minor" is where the law. FUCKED up.
I don't like to repeat myself, but here: The officer was in the car. The minor was wired. The cop would have known I would have asked her for ID. The cop proceeded to cite me anyways. That = Entrapment.
If you can't see that, then I honestly don't know how else to explain to you to make you understand that its Entrapment and the 'technicality' that the PA is talking about, is the simple fact he knows its a Federal Offence to Entrap someone, and he knows that's what they did.
Seriously, how IS IT NOT Entrapment? I did break the law, yes. I have stated that many times. But they Entrapped me into doing so by not presenting ID when BY LAW, they are supposed to.
Edit: I misread what you said, but my point about the Due Process still remains, that's why I've left it there.
Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 8 2009, 8:58 pm by Kellimus.
None.