OMG! That Tx decision is BEAST!!! This case essentially shoots down every reason that law enforcement give for performing a "pro-active" sex sting:
Ex Parte John Christopher Lo vs. Texas, NO. PD-1560-12, (Court of Appeals, October 30, 2013)
“The Government may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech.
Protected speech does not become unprotected merely because it resembles the latter. The Constitution requires the reverse.”
This rule reflects the judgment that “[t]he possible harm to society in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished is outweighed by the possibility that protected speech of others may be muted[.]”...
Free Speech Coalition tells us that a ban upon constitutionally protected speech may not be upheld on the theory that
“law enforcement is hard,”
and the State may not punish speech simply because that speech increases the chance that
“a pervert” might commit an illegal act “at some indefinite future time.”...
It isn't really that broad either. The court upheld every other section of the statute including the solicitation section. Essentially what it means is a conversation with a child can contain sexually explicit content as long as there is no solicitation of the child to engage in illegal sexual conduct.
How many times do I have to say it: It does not matter that the case is from TX because they used the federal constitution to come to their decision, they used Supreme Court Precedence, and we have FL cases that essentially say the same thing! Also, it does not matter that it is not broad and only encompasses the sexually explicit speech stating that the intent to seduce is illegal and not the speech itself.
This TX case is similar to:
Jeffery L. Cashatt v. State of Florida, 873 So. 2d 430 (2004)
…sexually oriented communication on a computer on-line service which is viewed by a child is not a violation of the statute unless the sender of the communication “knowingly” attempts by the communication to seduce the child.
but goes even further to explain why. I.e. It is not illegal to respond to obvious solicitations from a "minor" even with obvious solicitations because it was NEVER YOUR INTENT TO SEDUCE BUT IT WAS THEIRS. The consensual nature of the stings and the way they are obviously looking for sex MAKES ANY SPEECH RESPONDING TO THE FAKE SCENARIO PROTECTED SPEECH because the targets DO NOT KNOWINGLY attempt to seduce but merely respond to a wanted and willing solicitation.
Thus, THIS CASE CAN BE USED WITH THE SUPREME COURT PRECEDENCE IN IT along with some FL cases to prove that THE METHODS USED IN THESE STINGS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND FREE SPEECH!
The Texas case does not do that. Florida has no remotely equivalent statute to what was struck down in this case. The Texas equivalent of the Florida statutes is 33.021(c) the Constitutionality of which as this case points out had been upheld already in Maloney v. State; 294 SW 3d 613 (Tex App 2009)
"33.021(c) A person commits an offense if the person, over the Internet, by electronic mail or text message or other electronic message service or system, or through a commercial online service, knowingly solicits a minor to meet another person, including the actor, with the intent that the minor will engage in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, or deviate sexual intercourse with the actor or another person."
What was struck down was 33.021(b) which had absolutely nothing to do with solicitation.
it's the precedence of the texas decision that's of interest and relevance.
everyone read and re-read all this carefully, ask me to clarify if it doesn't make sense; i know the law can appear confusing and vague:
847.0135 LEGAL INTERPRETATION:
i've mentioned this before about focusing on 847.0135's use of "knowingly" with "consent to participation of" or "to commit" 794, 800, 827. in florida statutes: legislators use the words "knowingly" and "solicit" "lure" "entice" "seduce" contingent on garnering a minor to "commit" or parent/legal guardian/"custodian" to "consent to the participation". this translates to a premeditated intent to persuade unlawful activity and is the objective of a predator. the way the statute is provided, it criminalises someone who is taking consciously seeking to take the "the offensive" or leading role in a conversation (of non-sexual origin) to direct a minor or parent/guardian/"custodian" of a minor's mindset/intent from a legal or neutral context/topic/nature (non-sexual origin/topic; not originating from a sex/adult/dating personals/chat) with what would begin as an unwilling minor or parent/"custodian" of a minor (not expressing sexually overtness or promiscuous, readiness to commit) to convince/persuade/influence them into an illegal context and activity. this is called "grooming", which is a step beyond expressing or reciprocating interest. a defendant's sexual interest in the minor is not criminalised; only when they try to manipulate a minor into a sexual arrangement.
INVALID 847.0135 APPLICATION:
when law officers post a sexual solicitation on a casual sex or adult personals/meeting service, posing as a willing minor or adult & minor posting an adult advertisement under the guise of an adult, they are 1) falsely advertising and 2) setting the context/tone/topic and 3) expressing their consent to or readiness to commit which is understood by anyone approaching/interacting with them, and they are doing the soliciting/luring/enticing/seducing. their own illegal suggestive solicitation and readiness expressing/confirming consent is not a result or response from any "soliciting" "luring "enticing" "seducing" from the defendant. so i'm not convinced 847.0135 has been violated.
uncriminalised scenario: minor in a suggestive/sexual adult setting approaches or advertises herself as a promiscuous girl, ready to sex it up, to which the deft responds to expressing interest. criminalised scenario: defendant approaches a minor in a neutral, mixed-age setting, and convinces her to have sex with him.
law enforcement knows the stereotypical image of predators' "grooming" and goes out of their way to non-nonchalantly request some guys to bring typical items the general population associates with "grooming" (candies, gifts) or "partying" (booze, condoms). when it's questioned why or presented that their solicitation occurred on a casual sex site, they lie, suppress, downplay, and/or attempt to justify their original presence or solicitation because it'd put their stings in peril.
also, it's unconstitutional for the prosecution dictating a defendant's belief or intent or interpretation for him without an outright confession, or investigation on him to reveal known propensities, even if you raised entrapment, allowing the state to dictate a deft's thoughts has nothing to do with "viewing the situation in light most favourable to the state", because if it did, you'd lose every time. gennette's case illustrates this issue a bit. without an investigation i'm not sure what the prosecution/judges are defining as what a defendant believes.
doesn't allow police decoys; there must be a real minor, and her age must be proven to the court. doesn't matter if you agreed and "attempted" (should be conspired in adult mediator cases) to have sex with a police decoy minor whether directly or via an adult decoy; this statute not applicable bc it doesn't provide for law enforcement decoys.
scratch the "this is called "grooming", which is a step beyond expressing or reciprocating interest." a couple paragraphs up; grooming can be considered a typical basis for lure entice seduce.
basically 847.0135 criminalises someone manipulating or eliciting a minor's decision to engage in sexual activity or parent/custodian's consent to the participation of their minor in sexual activity
You should keep the grooming, that's what the Texas statute tried to target but Florida does not have an equivalent. Grooming occurs before solicit, lure, seduce, or entice.
800.04 - Completed offenses do require an actual minor however no one is charged with a completed 800.04 offense during a sting operation, they are charged with criminal attempt of an underlying offense. The State doesn't have to prove the elements of the underlying offense. If they did, criminal attempt wouldn't exist. Instead they have to prove the elements of criminal attempt which are unique to criminal attempt and completely different than any underlying offense. The question of whether or not criminal attempt requires an actual minor like a completed has already been addressed in Florida case law and the answer was no. The Pamblanco opinion explicitly stated it did not address criminal attempt so nothing has changed. This is why despite Pamblanco many 800.04 charges are sticking.
i was referring to where/how i put grooming in my message; fragmented from jumping around. grooming is an essential element for 847.0135 and has been ignored.
847.0135 provides two areas for police decoys, stating "The fact that an undercover operative or law enforcement officer was involved in the detection and investigation of an offense under this subsection shall not constitute a defense to a prosecution under this subsection."
800.04 has no such provisions. the judicial branch can't conjure up the law as they see fit; statutory interpretation is to be construed in favour of the deft, anyway. 777.04 has nothing to do with allowing police decoys. 777.04(1/attempt) addresses intent similar to 847.0135: "Criminal attempt includes the act of an adult who, with intent to commit an offense prohibited by law, allures, seduces, coaxes, or induces a child under the age of 12 to engage in an offense prohibited by law.".
800.04 & 847.0135 "A PERSON BELIEVED TO BE" & "ANOTHER PERSON BELIEVED BY THE PERSON" CLAUSES
aside from the issue of dictating a person's belief for him is a more immediate issue: the "a person to be believed" and "another person believed by the person to be a child" clauses do not exist in 800.04 like it does in 847.0135; my analysis is that 847.0135's "a person to believed to be" and "another person believed by the person to be a child" does not convey the same meaning as 800.04's "perpetrator’s ignorance of the victim’s age" or "victim's misrepresentation of his or her age" or "the perpetrator’s bona fide belief of the victim’s age". the way i interpret the 847.0135 clause's language is it seems to allow people to misrepresent their identity--police decoys--whereas 800.04 seems to only allow a real minor to lie about their age as being an adult age, to which the adult being lied to is essentially held responsible and culpable for not verifying this and believing the minor. this is what happened in munoz. also the "believed" parts are limited; there must be a real child involved in some capacity read the following, and focus on where "believed to be" is and isn't:
·847.0135(3a/4a): "(attempt to) seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or another person believed by the person to be a child, to (3a)commit/(4a)engage any illegal act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in any unlawful sexual conduct with a child (3a only): or with another person believed by the person to be a child;..." ·847.0135(3b/4b): "(attempt to) solicit, lure, or entice a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child or a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child to consent to the participation of such child in any act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in any sexual conduct..."
only subsections 2 and 5 seem to permit more liberal undercover law enforcement involvement: "The fact that an undercover operative or law enforcement officer was involved in the detection and investigation of an offense under this section shall not constitute a defense to a prosecution under this section."
subsections 3 and 4, what we're charged with, are much more restricted than sections 2 and 5: along with what i mentioned a couple posts up about the use of the words "seduce/solicit/lure/entice" referring to intent to persuade, the use of "knowingly" "seduce/solicit/lure/entice" "to commit/consent" along with where "a child" vs "a person believed to be a child" and "a parent/guardian/custodian" vs "a "another person believed to be parent/guardian/custodian" is used significant and actually means something. i interpret this as law enforcement may only perform reactive investigations only--that means intervene in an ongoing incident, not originate one, as a real child is required in most of these subsections.
3a/4a issue: based on this "a person believed to be a child" clause, 4a is suspect to be invalid because there is no "or with another person believed by the person to be a child" like in 3a at the end which describes the actual commission stage of the incident. so let's say in theory if a sting was catching legit predators who were intent on seeking to persuade children into sexual activity like i described in my previous post (not like in our stings), they could only be charged as far as 3a because ther was no real minor he actually attempted to meet to engage in sexual activity. this language in the statute would make sense to apply only in a reactive investigation where law enforcement assumes the role of a child already being groomed/victimised in order to intercept the pedo.
3b/4b issue: this subsection provides "a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child" instead of "a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a person believed to be a child".
so neither of these 3b/4b are applicable when there's no real child. the way i interpret this to be applicable is law enforcement would have to assume the role of a parent/guardian/custodian of a real child, which would make sense that this was intended to allow law enforcement to pursue a reactive investigation of a parent already abusing their child with/to other people.
800.04 & "a person believed to be" clause 800.04 doesn't provide the "a person believed to be" or "another person believed to be" clauses in any subsection. 800.04 has a provision in its definitions that addresses a minor victim misrepresenting their age, not assume another identity (e.g. police decoy) misrepresenting their age: ·800.04(3): "IGNORANCE OR BELIEF OF VICTIM’S AGE.—The perpetrator’s ignorance of the victim’s age, the victim’s misrepresentation of his or her age, or the perpetrator’s bona fide belief of the victim’s age cannot be raised as a defense in a prosecution under this section."
munoz & 800.04; responsibility of adult for verification of age this verification of age is what munoz who was subject to be held culpable for. since law enforcement used a real minor CI, munoz was legitimately charged with the 847.012 which held him accountable for it just like 800.04--they have the same provision criminalising non-verification--but only was reversed because it was law enforcement was the one who recruited and instructed the minor to misrepresent her age and instructed and provided her the inducement for munoz to do so. for anyone who hasn't read munoz, it's the current precedence of what entrapment is, here's munoz in a nutshell: bay county sheriffs office recruited a real sixteen-year-old confidential informant to assist law enforcement follow up on an anonymous tip that munoz's video store was renting minors adult videos. so they instructed her to lie about her age (which is statutorily permissible like in 800.04) and provided her a membership card (of a 34 year-old adult she claimed to be a girlfriend of) from munoz's store (this had the effect of inducement to munoz; trust) provided to her by police (this is where it became entrapment as a matter of law) with instructions to provide it to munoz while stating "i forgot my ID" to bypass having to verify her age with state identification to munoz to allow her purchase of adult videos; this "i forgot my ID" scenario is the basis of tobacco and alchohol sales stings. however, the court found that this use of a membership card from his store had the effect of inducing munoz (by him trusting her to be an adult as she claimed to be the girlfriend--therefore sexually involved--of the member on the membership's card which reflected him to be 34) to rent it to her and was sufficient grounds for entrapment since law enforcement provided and devised the inducement. now some asshole could say that she could have been assumed a minor sexing an adult, but in US law, you're presumed to be a law abiding citizen until proven otherwise. so i can understand the court's mentioning of the member's age as significant grounds for inducement.
another comparison of an instance of how this is inducement can be like when clubs tag minors and adults separately to indicator to the bartenders who is legal to serve without having to ID everyone.
all 777.04 is the stage or variation of the crime; i don't see any provision allowing them to modify or omit the requirements of the crime (statute) it's applied to. so i don't understand how attempt versus solicitation or conspiracy or any of this statute affects the necessity of elements of a crime it's attached to exist. further, neither provides or addresses theoretical scenarios, elements, or a target to have "believed" something to be, or "a person believed to be", or "another person believed to be", or any provision allowing law enforcement any exceptions to produce elements of a criminalising a statute, or to modify the requirement of the elements it's being applied to.
777.04: attempt, solicitation, and conspiracy. (1) ATTEMPT: A person who attempts to commit an offense prohibited by law and in such attempt does any act toward the commission of such offense, but fails in the perpetration or is intercepted or prevented in the execution thereof, commits the offense of criminal attempt, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4). Criminal attempt includes the act of an adult who, with intent to commit an offense prohibited by law, allures, seduces, coaxes, or induces a child under the age of 12 to engage in an offense prohibited by law.
(2) SOLICITATION (solicit): A person who solicits another to commit an offense prohibited by law and in the course of such solicitation commands, encourages, hires, or requests another person to engage in specific conduct which would constitute such offense or an attempt to commit such offense commits the offense of criminal solicitation, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4).
(3) CONSPIRACY (conspire): A person who agrees, conspires, combines, or confederates with another person or persons to commit any offense commits the offense of criminal conspiracy, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4).
statutory misinterpretation it's not within the judicidal branch's authority to dictate the law on the fly, judge janice brown essentially stated this regarding this issue in federal court with the federal statute. so basically if the law does and doesn't provide exact text to punish a situation, the judicial branch may not construe a statute unfavourably against the one being charged; this is common knowledge in the justice system though our cases are not having this practise applied.
maybe i'm delusional but i think these are legit issues.
disclaimer: i'm not a lawyer and this isnt legal advice
We need to find some attorneys who want to beat this thing ! Destroy them in court prove these badass cops are wrong . There just doing random cast netting and people are suffering! We need le to stand up and get a conscience and admit what they have done. What happened to the good people in this world??
I left my story on the Florida ACLU Website, explaining what has happened to me. Hopefully someone will look at it one of these days. Its under the name Michael Justice
When people want to come up with a game plan and stop crying that nothing will change, then I will jump back in this fight, but I am tired of of people complaining that nothing works when nothing is being done. I have plenty of other things I could be doing, believe me, so I am going to take the time to get them done. I am tired of hearing about some fictitious meeting in DC, i'm tired of hearing about this training manual that exists in some secret vault in Ft. Knox apparently and I am just tired and aggravated. So now that my case is closed with the sentence being vacated with the charges dismissed as of yesterday, it is time to take care of ME for a frickin change and there are already things i should have had done that I have neglected because I am constantly busy in the pursuit of justice. I have made suggestions and nobody seems to follow through with them. I have requested info from Tally, yet I still wait for that as well. I am pretty sure when somebody asks something of myself, that i make a pretty good effort in filling that request. I know there are some things that we cannot control, but i know for sure that there are many things where the ball has been dropped and that is inexcusable. It seems as if most are quite content on challenging their individual cases and scared to speak out which is their decision. but there is no excuse with all the information we have on Florida stings that we cannot put a stop to them as in Georgia. I'll tell you why that hasn't happened.... nobody has followed up or complained/ continually complained to the Department of Justice. There is no reason why people are not calling them on a daily basis. Nobody has filed anything with the FBI as well......its not hard to figure out if the FBI is investigating the Georgia task force that maybe that should have happened by now, but it hasn't. If there's going to be change, it's not going to happen crying about it. It's about acting on it! I'll keep an eye on the blog, but i would like to see what the hell people are wanting to do for a change. I am tired of making suggestions for nothing but here's a suggestion in the mean time.....somebody needs to get in touch with McCrackon Poston and find out the name and number of the FBI agent involved with that investigation and give him a call. I also wonder how many have even sent the article out to others? The article should be sent out all over the place! I guess we will see what happens!
I am going to repost part of a previous comment i made because it holds true.... People only feel that their situation shames them because they let it! I'm sorry, but that i don't buy that one bit whatsoever. You can private your messages on facebook. I am sure most people's families and friends are well aware of what has happened and if they don't then this would be a good reason to inform them of the truth. The only predators are those of law enforcement who are preying on the minds of the public making them believe that they are actually doing our country some good by making these false arrests. Those who believe what LEO's say are weak-minded. Those who listen to both sides before formulating an opinion are thoughtful, and those who see things for what they truly are are informed!
I completely agree, I look forward to having my case resolved. I believe my case will have a great impact on other cases throughout the state. I am here to help as wel and I am not going anywhere. I have written letters to the florida Bar Association for unfair practices from the prosecuting attorney. I have written 2 letters to the ACLU as well as posted on the FLACLU facebook page. I have sent a mountain of evidence to the Department of justice and I have friends and family contacting local media in Panama City as well as congressman Steve Southerland. I have been shamed but I don't feel shamed. My resolve gets stronger and stronger the more the state and law enforcement screw with me. The more they screw with me the more evidence I have later against them.
I am not whining I always go where you tell me to I just don't know what else to do . I comment write letters nothing changes. Nothing's changed in two years. It's frusturating you start to believe nothing will work . The FBI needs to be contacted by someone with some backing . I don't know . I willing to do whatever .
You know people are scared awaiting trial on probation. It's not easy. Everyone appreciates all you have done or are trying to do . People are fighting for their lives and it's hard to know what to do. Maybe you need to take some you time and refresh yourself. It's well deserved!
Talkng Stang Thank you. Prince I can relate. Jenn hang in there. Talkng Stang get up form up close ranks if we go down we go down fighting. - Danny Pasicolan
THE TX DECISION DOES APPLY!!! The Florida statutes already state that THE ONLY THING THAT IS CRIMINAL IS THE INTENT AND NOT THE SPEECH. If the communications do not PROVE that it was the "targets" intent to persuade or induce the "minor" to engage in illegal sexual activity then they have committed no crime. Therefore, IT IS ILLEGAL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO POSE AS A PROMISCUOUS TEEN LOOKING TO ENCOURAGE AND SEDUCE YOU. YOU CANNOT SEDUCE THE WILLING!!!
I have proof that I know what I am talking about and that it works so despite what ANYONE says, from now on what I say goes!!! If you don't knowingly intend to solicit a minor for sex then regardless of what you say, you have not violated the law particularly when it is obvious that "the minor" intended to persuade you or had the intent to make you solicit them!!!
Funny that is in direct conflict with what several actual attorneys I've talked have said. Where is the proof? Is it with the super secret training manual?
If what you say goes, consider me gone because now you're just being an asshole
Well I didn't mean to be an asshole and if I came off that way then I am sorry. What I meant to say was, just because it might not make sense now does not mean that there is no reason not to try it. Use everything you got! Just do it and you will be surprised what will work and what won't.
Just because you have talked to attorneys does not mean that they are right. That has been part of the problem this whole time is that attorneys do not even know what they are talking about which is really sad. EVERYONE involved with the judicial system is "off track" and have no idea what the proper way to apply the law is. If they knew what the hell they were doing the shit would have never started in the first place. THE MEN BEING ARRESTED ARE NOT EVEN BREAKING THE LAW UNDER THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE F****** STATUTES! This is where the first amendment meets criminal law:
The proof is all these cases that are being won and the fact that attorneys are contacting us wanting to be advertised on here. That "super secret training manual" will pop up sooner or later. The person that informed us of it's existence has been gone for a bit but hopefully will be back soon.
If I seem to be coming off as an asshole it's because I am severely pissed off that the lack of action with this movement has caused one of our own to get discouraged and quit! THIS IS NOT A PISS AND MOAN FORUM NOR A DISCUSSION FORUM. This is a way to get information to see what might work and to do it. NOT to talk about why it MIGHT not work. There have been other things that have been mentioned on here that you said would not work but they have. These people are looking to us for answers and yes WE have a lot of answers. The last thing we need is to discourage them even more by being pessimistic about every little thing we find trying to convince ourselves and everyone else that it won't work or the info is not good.
Speaking of Talkn Stang, I think maybe he forgot where he came from. Had it not been for ALL OF US he would have not won his case! He might have got violated on his probation and went to prison. He did not even know what an appellate bond was had I not told him AND HIS ATTORNEY DAMN SURE DIDN'T TELL HIM!
So go ahead and trust these dumb ass attorneys if you want to but THERE IS NO REASON TO TRUST THEM until they start producing results and represent people with FULL HONESTY AND PROPER LEGAL ADVICE. Not telling a defendant about something that could mean everything with the case or minimizing a very important legal point IS NOT BEING A GOOD ATTORNEY. They are acting like you act a lot of times instead of being optimistic and TRYING EVERYTHING THEY GOT! A lot of people on here act as though the government has already won and it would take a miracle to turn things around but not on my watch. WE DON'T NEED MIRACLES! WE NEED TO DO SHIT EVEN IF WE THINK IT WON'T WORK AND TRY OUR BEST TO MAKE IT WORK!!! That's what I meant by "what I say goes" because we can "make a square peg fit into a round hole" and we don't have any room for excuses or pessimism. PUT YOUR F****** NIKES ON!!!
Due Process, I came to this blog for help. I got it. TalknStang referred me to new attorneys after my son was convicted because his PD did NOT try ANYTHING. Upon the verdict, he turned to me and said "these cases are hard." But he did NOT EVEN TRY! He didn't even raise objections to LIES and outrageous ASSUMPTIONS told by LEO in court!
I am thankful for that support from this blog. I guess it is a "pay it forward" kind of thing. You help TalknStang, he helped me, we help and support each other. We do not need pessimism here. I agree with you, attorneys should at least try--put everything in front of the court, the judge, the jury and see what "sticks." Let the prosecutor object and make a case...make THEM work for a change! I have not seen prosecutors hold back anything because "it might be questionable practice" or "it might not stick." This is very much unchartered territory for many of us. I appreciate your rallying the troops!
I have written letters to DOJ without response, I have sought ACLU attention...and now that my son may be facing a retrial, and I hold a very public position at work, I have been advised by our lawyer to keep a low profile, so I will not be public, for now. I have to follow their advice. I feel bad that I cannot do more--like speak with the media. But I will continue to work behind the scenes. My son cannot access internet at all... so I have to relay this information to him. Please keep up the good fight!
i agree with this; the current approach used by most, if not all, attorneys isn't working. i've lost alot of respect for attorneys opinions because they ignore critical facts of a case and take the position that you're guilty until you proven yourself innocent, as well as not contesting the prosecutions arguments. they're obviously unskilled with handling these cases which is why nearly everyone is losing. telling a defendant that they have no grounds for aquittal by conceding to anything the prosecution says is not what an attorney should be doing. there needs to be new approaches and new legal theories that must work and be attempted to reach a new precedence, which is what i hope we accomplish here. i cannot believe the constitution would permit such activity by law enforcement and the government.
"cigarcitygirl", not everyone can "take on the world" and we don't expect you to. If you are doing the things you say you are doing then that is just fine. As long as you keep fighting your case WITH EVERYTHING WE GOT that is really enough because a victory for you means a victory for all of us and brings us one step closer to our goal. This blog is meant to help people and give them information that their attorney does not take the time to look up and use. This blog was meant to let the people know what their attorneys should be telling them and what arguments they should be using and if the attorney refuses to use the info then it's time to get a new attorney.
The main cause of ALL of these convictions is from ineffective counsel. I am not just talking about the fact that over 95% of the convictions come from pleas but also the remaining 5% that make it to trial. THERE IS NO REASON OR EXCUSE FOR LOSING THESE CASES! If a case is lost, then it's the attorneys fault due to substandard performance and letting the system walk all over their clients. Attorneys should not be afraid to call the prosecutors and detectives liars in open court!
This blog is also not just to help the defendants but also to help the attorneys. Your attorney was only half wrong about these cases being tough because these cases can be SO EASY when the proper arguments are made and the prosecution is "kept in line" BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN REAL CRIME NOR DO THEY RESEMBLE IT. If the attorney lets the prosecution make weak assumptions, lie in open court, use inadmissible evidence like legal porn to falsify predisposition, use false and unproven statistics, and lets the detectives blatantly lie and say that they were not seeking for sex then of course the cases are hard. THIS IS A SICK, TWISTED, AND HIGHLY IMMORAL TOPIC BUT IT'S STILL ENTRAPMENT and an attorney should be walking into a case like this with that same mindset and keep that mindset until it's closed. They should forget about what society says about these men (BECAUSE SOCIETY IS BEING LIED TO) and PROVE THAT THE LAW SAYS THEY ARE INNOCENT! The information in this blog helps with this task and does prove the men are innocent. I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT ANY COP, PROSECUTOR, JUDGE OR JURY SAYS BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE AND PROOF WE HAVE IS OVERWHELMING!!! We basically are going to make them yield for fear of them "sticking their foot in their mouth". WE ARE RIGHT ABOUT THIS AND WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER!!!
I get so mad when an attorney says that something will not work. We are trying to "correct the way attorneys think and interpret the law" so the last thing we need here is a pessimist. Something should be done whether you think it should work or not because we know that we are right and in the end WE WILL WIN and in fact already have!
this is an improper statement..."The main cause of ALL of these convictions is from ineffective counsel" Playing the blame game will get you nowhere and remarks like that are counterproductive. DELETE DELETE DELETE. You need to stop worrying about interpreting law and formulate a plan to stop the stings. Your opinions and perceptions will get you nowhere. I wonder how how that investigation is going in Georgia? Must be nice to live in NW Georgia where you don't have to worry about corrupt LEO's infiltrating lives of innocent men who want to use a social networking site to meet WOMEN. lol
I'm the pessimist? Seriously? Do I really need to go back through all your comments and emails just to show how much of a hypocrite that statement makes you? You have shot down more ideas on here than any other three people combined. Take Pamblanco for instance. It took several people arguing with you for about three weeks before you would even acknowledge it had any importance whatsoever. Anything ICAC related? That took MONTHS all the while you kept telling everyone it was stupid and useless.
Everything presented on here needs to be discussed including why it might not work. If you don't pay attention to why it won't work, you will NEVER win and trying to blame a loss on a judge's abuse of discretion is pointless when there is an obvious flaw in the argument and that's the real reason it failed.
Take the Texas decision. It is not a "cure all" and will be extremely difficult to apply to Florida law. When somebody tries using every point you have made it will still fail because all the State has to say is "Your Honor, Florida does not have a statute substantially similar to the one at issue in this decision and the Texas courts have expressly upheld the solicitation statute that is substantially similar to the Florida solicitation statutes." and the motion will be denied. That's what you need to defeat first before anything will ever happen and people need to know that before attempting to use this decision in any meaningful way.
Another example? Pamblanco. It took weeks of arguing before you even acknowledged Pamblanco had any importance and now you prescribe it as another "cure all" without ever bothering to tell anybody why it might not work and the reality is it doesn't work all of the time. Why not? It's not because of a judge's abuse of discretion. It's because as I've said before Pamblanco does not address lewd/lascivious charges in the context of criminal attempt and people need to know that before trying to use it in court because all the State has to do is raise Hudson v. State, 745 So. 2d 997 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 2nd Dist. 1999 and the argument is over 75% lost. That fact is something people need to know. Without addressing Hudson you are virtually guaranteed to lose.
As far as other things I've said wouldn't work on here you better be ready to provide actual PROOF to back that statement up instead of just blowing smoke. One, there's only a couple of times I have ever said something wouldn't work one of which is this Texas case and I've never said anything remotely resembling telling people not to try it. The most I have done is point out issues the State will raise to defeat the argument or current legal precedent.
You might want to think about apologizing to the attorneys linked here too. Some of them are the Dumb Ass attorneys whose opinions I've been trusting.
I am going to exercise my 1st amendment rights now that i am a free man and chime in here. There seems to be some dissention in the ranks. People have lost sight of the objective and what it is going to take to stop these stings. THE IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE IS TO STOP THE STINGS, and not to worry about what the hell is going on in Texas anyway cuz honestly, i could care less. unless I lived in Texas. The bottom line is if you shut down the stings, you cut the head of the snake off. You slice and dice the umbilical cord which is their financial feeding tube so to speak and there will be much success. Georgia did it, but this disorganized mess has not been able to accomplish that yet and why? Its simple, there is no plan of action; no gameplan, etc. So somebody needs to come up with ideas in order to make that happen. That should be everyones focus in my opinion
and just because you try once or twice without success, that doesn't mean give up. You have to CALL, harass, bully, and get mad, but in a tactful kind of way,as well as let others know what you are doing.
this is an improper statement..."The main cause of ALL of these convictions is from ineffective counsel" Playing the blame game will get you nowhere and remarks like that are counterproductive. DELETE DELETE DELETE. You need to stop worrying about interpreting law and formulate a plan to stop the stings. Your opinions and perceptions will get you nowhere. I wonder how how that investigation is going in Georgia? Must be nice to live in NW Georgia where you don't have to worry about corrupt LEO's infiltrating lives of innocent men who want to use a social networking site to meet WOMEN. lol
I would like to comment on what I see as the true value of this blog is and how much value it has provided to our family. This blog has to serve two functions, fighting for the bigger cause but in the meantime helping the individuals caught in this mess keeping their heads above water. We are now on our third lawyer, the first one lasted one meeting because while they were with a firm that appeared to know how to fight these cases, immediately recommended my son take a plea. The second lawyer was all set to fight until some of the elements did not line up exactly as he thought they should, and then he recommended a plea. We were considering it until we started reading all of the files and absorbing the research from this ‘family’. We argued with our lawyer that we would rather go down fighting than take the plea. Our current lawyer, who believes that the charges against our son are a violation of his rights, and is open to the information we provide from the blog. As she points out each case is different and there is no cookie cutter answer that will fit every case BUT she has recently filed a motion to dismiss based on 3 areas: objective entrapment, subjective entrapment, and violation of first amendment rights. We expect the hearing to argue the motion to dismiss the first full week in January. An area that we see as a way to help us working to keep our heads above water, add a section for transcripts. For many of us we hear about the successful cases through the blog, but if we had a collection of transcripts that could be quickly accessed, this would help so much in the time to determine if a strategy would be useful as transcripts could take 30 days to receive if you have to order them and also in keeping costs down. We have the transcripts from the Morgan trial (Citrus County – this is the one that the lawyer won not guilty on 2 of the 3 charges without the ability to argue entrapment and then on appeal the last charge was dropped because the appeal court stated that he should have been allowed entrapment), and from the Palmer trial (we only have the transcripts from the jury selection, interrogation of the primary police witness, and the closing arguments). If we can create a shared area for these and other transcripts that others may have, then this can assist with sharing the best practices for other attorneys. Also add a section to post motions. Our attorney has been able to obtain motions to review, and many of these were based on leads from the blog and others were on her knowledge of this area. Again, this would be a way to share best practices because as we know that for some counties this is very difficult to obtain and for the truly successful cases, the data may be expunged. This is what happened for the transcripts for the case Fetterman won in Citrus County. The database is awesome, this is a huge step forward in taking this from a feeling of what was happening to facts. In my opinion, another avenue would be coordinating information to determine if there are any patterns with some of the detectives serving as chatters. Unfortunately this information will only come out from the cases that go to deposition and/or trial, but this could be useful for again documenting that there are relatively few ‘chatters’ in the state and these problems can be tied back to the procedures of the lead detectives. For example in our case, the chatting detective has admitted during the deposition that upon review he was the one that introduced sex into the texting.
Again this blog has been amazing in helping us understand the big picture. For many of us right now we are so busy trying to keep our heads above water that it is difficult to see how we can support the big picture. I agree that the new database on tracking emails and other contacts will help in understanding the efforts others may be doing to support the big picture.
For any documents you can use this link to get them to me.
http://dbinbox.com/stoptheinsanity75
Right now there is a 50 MB files size limit for uploading but that should be plenty for any document. Anything you upload will either be put in a blog post or added to the Documents Page of the Stop the Insanity blog. There is also a little more info on Uploading files available.
We are currently waiting on transcripts for my sons appeal. Apeals take a long time so I've heard when we get them I would share and welcome any good proved advice on how to beat this .
Ok so let me share my opinion. First off, I don't like what I'm seeing ONE BIT. It seems as if we are starting to turn on our "own" and that saddens me. Even though most of us have never met each other we're all "family" now, and here to support and uplift each other. So stop with the bs!!! Ok, I agree with all the arguments to a certain extent. A REALLY big factor in winning these cases IS having the right attorney, I, I'm sure as everyone else has experienced that first hand. Someone who is understand, and willing to be your partner rather than just your lawyer is huge. I can tell you how many times I've heard "lawyers" tell me "I went to school for this not you", and "I'm the driver of this train". I'm blessed to have found someone who is understanding and takes my suggestions into consideration and actually uses them. He truly believes I'm innocent, and that's also important. We are a team. Secondly you DO have to be a realist, and think positively and unfortunately negatively as well (but more positive though lol). I'm a person of faith and I truly believe in GOD'S time, he will clean up this mess, and those who are doing this to innocent people will reap what they sow. Now I believe lawyers aren't tackling the right defenses, and being as aggressive as they could, you have to beat the prosecutors at their own game. Smart lawyers say things they know for a fact will get objected but do you know why they say it? Just to let the judge and jurors hear it. There's a notorious lawyer where I stay (who my family hired for another family member in a different type of case) she is absolutely crazy, my family member went to trial the first time and got a hung jury, she asked "why'd you lose the last time?" we stated "we didn't lose it was a hung jury" she said "YOU LOST" lol. Few judges even like her, but her track record for winning cases is insane. Other lawyers sit in her cases just to watch her. She had the prosecutor in my family member's case QUIT when he heard we had hired her. And she doesn't have a life outside of her job. You may be thinking why I'm typing this, but what I'm getting at is she doesn't give a damn what ANYONE says about her, the woman is good (the first time she went to my cousins house, she went straight to their refridgerator lol). She's aggressive, assertive, sarcastic when she needs to be, kinda like prosecutors are in these cases. Choosing a lawyer is critical and a test in iteslf. You NEED a good understanding lawyer, point blank simple. Now on to the statute 847.0135. I really don't understand why ppl are losing these cases left and right, well I do but...Unless YOU clearly induced, manipulated, coerced, threatened, offered a reward etc. how do you violate the statute? Now a huge problem and one I think is the root of the problem as well, is that SOMEHOW prosecutors are able to persuade the judge/jurors that they interested in sex WHATSOEVER which is bs. Basically the way I see it is that if there was any inducement, you did not violate the statute, even if you are predisposed. Like "person" said if the consent was already there, you can't solicit, seduce, lure etc. Something else needed to win these cases (and unfortunately this is out of our hands) but you need an indifferent judge. Someone who goes into these cases with an open mind. They are out there, I have one. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't belief also a factor in the statues? NO ONE can tell you what you believed unless it's clear in the messages that you did. As a matter of fact, ANYTHING the prosecutors try to assume is SPECULATION and can be objected over and over again, and should be sustained. Once again thank EVERYONE for all that they do, we aren't fighting a lost cause God WILL sort this out. But stop bickering with family it gets us nowhere!
I will say this one more time then I'm done with it. RALLY RALLY RALLY RALLY RALLY! And I'm not just talking about one. Do you guys not realize how much that WOULD help. Bringing signs, evidence of corruption (discovery) and law to prove it (case law, Standards, codification). There doesn't need to be hundreds of people, not even 50, or 20. We're all curious creatures by nature, people will be intrigued to find out what's going on, reporters included. Do you think it's a coincidence that lets just say 10-15 people were all caught in a CHILD sex sting on adult websites and not minor oriented ones, would it be a coincidence that NO ONE was seeking a minor, would it be a coincidence that in EVERY case a violation of law occurred on law enforcement's behalf, would it be a coincidence that in I'm sure EVERY case a bait and switch occurred? No, and others will see that, that's why there's no need for a ton people to participate. You have to crawl before you walk, we have to make them listen. Reporters will snatch this up I'm sure of it. By nature some people are followers in certain instances which isn't always a bad thing. I'm guilty of being a follower from time to time and that's why I think this hasn't been done yet. I believe a rally(ies) is the answer to our prayers. Oh and furthermore contrary to popular belief every time law enforcement open's their mouth, they dig themselves deeper and deeper, and I'm sure they'd want to try and justify their actions once it happens, but the good thing about that is there's no justification for doing what they've done, especially when it comes breaking what they're bound by. WE JUST NEED TO BE HEARD, THAT'S ALL and everything else will fall into place.
And I know it can't be hard to get 15 ppl to go, it's not secret woman wear the pants in the mariage make your husbands come. Other siblings of the victims, your sisters, brothers, cousins, friends etc. I'm sure they see how bad mothers other family members are hurting, if they love you it should be done no questions asked. I seen in Tally a group of no more than about 10 women rallying who had been sexually abused made it on the news. And one more thing then I'm done, people love SCANDALS more than ANYTHING. It draws viewers, they even made a show about it which is killing ratings I might add.
There is a "cookie cutter" defense for these stings because they are all performed with the same element: a promiscuous teen looking for sex that knows the "targets" are too testing their virtue but the targets are not engaged in crime but it unconstitutionally assumed that they ARE. I appologize for any statements that were made that was taken the wrong way. I should have said something like present company excluded. I am sure we are all doing what we can. The supreme court warned about amending statutes to support a failing method of enforcement. That it would create an unconstitutional construction because the courts would not do their job. "Person" is onto something and he is right that no violations of child solicitation are even occurring due to the similar element stated above making it (in my opinion) worse than just entrapment. "Aladdin" we are on the same page now and I'm sorry we just have a ton of families and children to save!
This is what I got back from Rick Scott in answer to the sex stings:
Dear Ms.
Thank you for contacting Governor Rick Scott's Office. The Governor appreciates your concerns and asked that I respond on his behalf.
Although we appreciate your concerns, the Governor has no legal jurisdiction in criminal cases. Each state attorney is an elected official charged with certain discretionary duties, including the duty to determine whether or not to prosecute any particular crime committed within his or her jurisdiction. This decision is based on the quality and quantity of the evidence of guilt shown, and in the best interest of justice. The state attorneys operate independently of the Governor's office. As elected officials, they answer to the voters of their individual jurisdictions. Questions about guilt or innocence, or the procedural fairness of convictions must be addressed in the courts. Those who wish to contest judicial rulings may wish to speak with an attorney about what appellate procedures may be available.
You can influence legislation regarding crime and punishment, and tools used by law enforcement by contacting your local legislative delegation. You can find contact information for your legislators and track bills as they proceed through the legislative process at www.leg.state.fl.us.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact the Governor's Office.
Sincerely,
Warren Davis Office of Citizen Services Executive Office of the Governor
I thought I read an apology.....did i read that correctly? well then i am back in. for now. Anyway, Devotedgf, i wouldn't expect Rick Scott's office to do anything, especially since Pam Bondi supports these operations. He is worthless anyway although he does have the power to stop these operations with the stroke of a pen at any time. The only way to do that is put pressure on him. THE IMMEDIATE GOAL IS TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO SHUT DOWN THE STINGS. It's fine to discuss court issues, but the courts are not going to shut down the stings.
That's not true, all that's needed is an EXTREMELY specific case law like the Aguirre case, and that'll be the end of that. They'd probably still do them but they'd have to change their game plan...a lot.
changing the game plan is one thing, shutting them down is another, but it is more than obvious that they are not even doing that after numerous favorable court rulings which essentially have changed nothing. The courts are ruling these cases by chat logs on a case by case basis and they are not being challenged on the "large" scale. Specific case law is just that..specific. What happened in NW Georgia is what needs to happen in Florida and that is where the focus needs to be
Does anybody have a reputable source that can be used in court, preferably case law that states the correct way of doing these operations? Like how you're not supposed to be an adult at all, and how you're not supposed to wait until the MIDDLE of a conversation to perform a bait and switch.
we have nothing that states anything of the sort, and that is why i state in the article that the few rules/regulations they have are insufficient. The government has essentially given LEO's a "blank check" to let them proceed how they want, where they want, and whenever they want. This is unacceptable. Just as there are rules that govern our everyday life, LEO's should be governed as well.
In the parent child scenario yes they are allowed to be an adult, but when there's just supposed to be a minor, they aren't supposed to be an adult at any time. I've seen many sources stating how these operations are supposed to be done but they aren't reputable. In the minor scenario an officer is supposed to make it very clear from the get-go that they are a "minor", and wait for people to come to them with illegal intentions.
yes....i've posted these links a few times. This special agent knows how to do a proper sting operation.....http://www.10news.com/news/10news-accompanies-fbi-sting-to-catch-online-sex-predators http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/FBI-Gives-Inside-Look-at-World-of-Child-Predators-232198031.html#comments
also, i want to make sure that i am correct in reading the following statement DUEPRO....".I have proof that I know what I am talking about and that it works so despite what ANYONE says, from now on what I say goes!!! " Whatever you say goes? If i were you, i think i might have a little explaining to do, because i am here to tell you whatever you say does not go!
What I meant was simply there is no reason to not try anything but attorneys seem to always find excuses and use the same line that they went to law school, not you. Meanwhile the accused are denied of their defense due to the personal, not legal, opinion of their attorney. I thought "Aladdin" was just giving the same excuses but all he is doing is preparing us. I have been guilty of attesting to the "fact" that something would not work but did it anyway. Then, wouldn't you know, it worked. The courts are not doing their jobs and no matter how we have to get them on track regardless if we THINK it will work or not we have to just do it because the truth is that we don't know. What we do know is that we are right and no matter how unreasonable or illogical we have to be to obtain our victory we MUST be it. This is an unreasonable and illogical situation so sometimes we MUST be that way too. It does not matter how we get from A to Z and we might get lucky and have the courts get us to our goal.
you are making a generalization and that is not cool. Instead of worrying about what attorneys should be doing, you need to working on what it will take to shut the stings down. That is within the scope of your duties. You can try to interpret and apply the law all you want, but at the end of the day, you're not an attorney or judge. Your focus needs to be on what it is going to take to shut down the stings. In fact, that's where everyone's focus should be. A gameplan needs to be formed and carried out with everyone in agreement.
You know just as well as I do that we need attorneys to work these cases and work them HARD in the system! See what the governor wrote back: AN EXCUSE! He does have the athority to stop these stings but he wont so we are stuck proving it in court. Then he might do something. We have a gameplan that everyone agrees on: 1. Work on getting all the info we have into an appendix. 2. Find an attorney to back us. 3. Get media coverage. 4. Get all the attorneys that handle these cases to handle them properly in court and not give up nor take any bs!
Exactly he has the authority and he can pardon people from this as well. he wants to be re-elected but he has not done anything in my book to deserve to be re-elected. I truly hope he doesn't think I am going to be smiling or shaking his hand when he comes to my job. I have no respect for him.
Once again, the game plan should be to shut the stings down, which is doable! Media coverage is part of that, yes! We cannot tell an attorney how to do his/her job
Gentlemen,this match is getting know where. Please remember first most of the people here is fighting for their lives and you can, I hope.remember what it felt live to be at this stage of their process. Yes shutting down the stings is our over all goal but we have to get past our freedom from getting taken away. If our cases continue to be lost and defendents continue to go to jail then we aren't going to beat the legality of these stings. Attorney work for us so yes they should do as we advise and we can tell them how to do their job. If we can successfully win our cases in the trial process then we can shut these stings down. We aren't using case law or convicted cases to prove our point. We are using case that have been won and/or over turned in appeal to prove our point. So please remember that the people fighting to say out of prison has immediate concearns like kids, careers and lives to fight for at this point. Now we greatly appreciate everything everyone has does but to start pointing fingers at who is and isn't working to a greater and common cause just show law enforcement and anyone else monitoring this site that we aren't a united front and it is a matter of time before we give up and except defeat. So to end my comments just understand what each of us are here for and that we all have our limitations and reason personally to fight. Thanks to everyone for fighting. p.s. the pamblanco case has been successful at get attempt charges thrown out. Never give up and never say never.
You can win a war without first winning many battles. I think we are all on the right track by informing all our battles with the information they need to win their battles. I think it is important to be septic b/c it helps us to allow us to reflect on what the state prosecutors will be thinking and that allows us to be better propared to argue our cases. I think law is a matter of interpretation to a large degree and everything is an argument. Present a possible argument and we can win these cases if not at trial but appeals. I know loosing at trail doesn't sound pleasent but if the appeals work then it set president case law to help with the battle. I personally was offered prison time as a plea so I know how scary it is to fight and experience the fear of the unknown jury verdict. Have faith.
I still think the FBI might be the appropriate authority for this matter even though Florida's ICAC are run by Sheriffs dept's. They are federally funded in the same exact fashion and federal agencies are involved in Florida's operations. I would think that would give the FBI jurisdiction in Florida to handle such a matter because I don't think I would trust FDLE....hell I don'tHere is the response from Georgia..........I reported it to a field agent that I knew, and he took it straight to the supervisor for the region. They started the process by getting two agents from another region to do a preliminary investigation. I spoke to both of them, and gave them everything. I at first thought they were OPR but they were the preliminary investigation. THEN, it went to OPR out of Washington. Still not sure where it is now and what happened with it I would go to the agent that you trust the most, and make a formal request that the agent you want investigated gets investigated, and explain exactly what unethical or illegal that he or she did.
I think that is a good way but I personally don't trust any law enforcement agency. Here is why. I thought it was fbi that got busted in Georgia and also have read that fbi was involved in some of the Florida operations. This is just my personal mistrust. I understand and do agree that it is an avenue that you feel comfortable with but I don't have the contacts that you have. I do think the governor of Florida does have the power to get involved b/c isn't he the one who insured that a prosecutor was found to prosecute George Zimmerman when local law enforcement failed to find probable cause to prosecute him. Governor Scott is about to enter into a re-election year so he isn't going to put his name on anything that will have any law enforcement union use to support his opponent. Politics 101.
Jacksonville, FL: (888) 722-1225 http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/corruption Here another link that might help I am trying to help but it is hard when you work two full time jobs just to make ends meet and there is no relief in site it seems or any light at the end of the tunnel at least for us any way but I am not giving up either.
Well I'm gonna be completely honest, and I think I speak for everyone when I say this. But my #1 goal right now, at this very moment, is to get my life back on track and put this behind me. And there's a tie for #2, which is, yes, putting an end to these illegal operations, and making sure the people who are behind these reap repercussions, and feel what they've made innocent people feel for so long now. No I'm not going on a killing spree lol.
i'm not bickering, i know i'm right. In fact, i am so sure of myself that i'd tattoo it on my forehead if i had to. lol But knowing i'm right and making it happen are 2 different things. I'm here to tell you that even after anybody wins their case, life doesn't suddenly get any better and I am finding that out each and every day. It's going to take time......the damage has been done, your name is plastered all over. Expungement is a pain and cost you money out of your pocket regardless if you win!, etc etc etc. You won't find a decent job until its expunged. If you want your rights back, to vote, guns, etc. you have to ask.......And the list goes on and on and on and on
something else I think is important.....although any charge dismissed or case tossed for whatever reason is always a good thing, but the best way to win a case is for entrapment. Entrapment places the responsibility in LEO's hands according to the law. That trumps any technicality anytime. The more entrapment cases ruled, the better! LEO's do not want cases lost by entrapment for obvious reasons!
In my opinion, the more motions the better, but i am not an attorney. They don't all win, but some work........here's an interesting example... Per the Court: -Defendant Second Motion to Dismiss is Denied -Defendant Amended Motion to Dismiss is Denied on objective of grounds of entrapment based on State's Traverse -Defense Motion to take additional Deposition on Sgt. Hanton, only to discuss as I.C.A.C.O Supervisor is Granted for 30 Minutes -Defense Motion to Compel Documentation as it pertains to departures from I.C.A.C.O by Orange County Sheriff is Denied. Defense needs to notice Orange County Sheriff Office. -State Motion in Limine to exclude Defense Expert is Granted, Defense will be given opportunity to file memorandum to dispute -Defense Motion to Compel I.C.A.C.O Manuals - Reserved Ruling, Defense needs to notice Department of Justice -Defense Motion to Compel Written Consent of Detective to disclose images - Moot State Provided images Defense Motion to Compel documentation of Deviation from I.C.A.C.O - Denied, no such documents exist -Defense Motion to Compel State Expert Training Material is Denied Defense Motion in Limine as to Paragraph 1,3,5 is Denied -As to Paragraph 2 ,Granted. -As to Paragraph 4, Granted. -As to Paragraph 6, Denied. -As to Paragraph 7, Denied. -As to Paragraph 8, as to Gambling condition, Marital Finances and Therapist and Denied in part, State to produce a redacted video consistent with the Court oral findings -As to Paragraph 9, Granted. -As to Paragraph 10, Denied. -As to Paragraph 11, Granted. -As to Paragraph 12, Granted. -As to Paragraph 13, Granted. -As to Paragraph 14, Granted. -As to Paragraph 15, Granted.
First I have to disagree with you Talkn Stang. The best way to win a case is any way that actually wins! Each case is different even if they all have common elements. The differences are beyond our control. For instance Pamblanco will get 800.04 charges dismissed in some jurisdictions but not in others. ICAC Standards are allowed in some places but not others. Entrapment works in some cases but not in others and sometimes the only way to win is to go to trial with the right attorney. There will never be a single defense that works for everybody all of the time and as much as we hate it, we have to accept there are going to be some cases that can't be won no matter what.
That leads to the current difference in priorities. I totally agree the number one goal should be to stop the stings period. That's the one thing that will help everybody but at the same time it's little solace to the guy that has to choose between a 10 year plea deal or go to trial next week to know that at some unknown point in the future the stings will be stopped.
People need to take care of themselves first and then help to end the stings. If any resolution to their case is 6 months out, then great, they can help working towards ending the stings while they wait. If a resolution is 6 weeks out, then they need to focus on their case, getting prepared for any consequences and nothing else. If they win, then hopefully they will start coming back here disclosing the full details of how they won so that it might help the next guy.
Anyway what I came here to post about is an Excel dump of the Sting database is now available on the documents page of the other blog.
Things to be done:
1. Finish making the attorney names uniform and linking them to an attorney table that includes contact information. 2. Provide links to the appropriate clerk of court page for each defendant. 3. The appeals table is done but the relationship and exactly what information is drawn from the appeals table needs to be established 4. Calculations - Keeping running totals of the stats we think are important. 5. Going live. This is already in progress. More details to come.
you didn't read what i said.....a victory is a victory no matter what, but entrapment is the best of them all. Objective would be ideal, but we havn't had such luck that we are aware of. And an even better victory would be to stick it to these corn-hole cops like Detective Scroggins' crying ass! The reason why Pamblanco charges are dismissed in some jurisdictions but not in others is because of IGNORANCE. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, unless you are a LEO working a sting operation. They could care less whose due process is violated so long as they make those arrests. They have gotten away with it for so long and have become complacent. One thing i want to remind people, double check your arrest affidavit to your chat logs for any discrepancies like things that were made up that you didn't say. It has happened and it happened to me. Unfortunately I overlooked it and didn't find out until after it was too late to use at trial phase. One thing is for sure, there is a lot more info to help guys than there was 3 years ago so the advantage is shifting in favor of defenses and I expect it to continue to do so as we find more things problematic for the state. We will take any X-mas gift they give us. Ho Ho Ho!
T-bone steak would have been much better. now I am hungry, thanks a lot, lol. Hey, if it worked out for me, it can work out for others and I only had a public defender, although outstanding one's who let me be a part of the process. There are some things we are working on and we are trying to put our heads together to see what the best plan of action would be. If we shut down the stings, everybody wins regardless of anything..
This is almost hard to watch, but it is unbelievable....although i believe him, lol You will love this video of this guy. We are already in touch with people involved in this situation http://www.sportsgrid.com/ncaa-football/alabama-fan-accused-of-craigslist-sex-15-year-old-sad-video/
Want to offer for you a user-friendly platform to businesses and individuals to Post Free Ads. Post Free Ads or get free account via Facebook Login in one click. Get more with free advertising at postallads4free.com
Talkn Stang, if you have an attorney willing to work with us then we need the link on here. Also, nobody is, was, or has really been fighting on here. We are all really frustrated because we know we are so close that we can smell it. The comment about free advertising brings up an idea! We should advertise the blog everywhere again especially since we can now use our own domain! When we get the landing page ready we will put it up so everyone can advertise! We should also check out the free advertising page anyway because LE might have a new target!
agreeable. Let's kick ass and take no prisoners. I am stirring up some controversy on the article below and I am really making some good progress. There are a gazillion commenters. Hopefully somebody will take notice of this and not the kind of notice where i get a knock at my door, lol
People, i am here to tell you that there is a major problem in America and somebody needs to take notice. After this latest incident, maybe somebody will start questioning some things. Please ensure your computers are firewalled and if you use P2P file sharing software, know what you are doing and downloading. If you see something suspicious, do not open it. Run any spyware/antivirus regularly. Nothing would surprise me anymore. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/ryan-loskarn-investigated-101016.html
This is the response i received from a former sting prosecutor in regards to the "Hot Latina" advertisement that there seems to be some confusion over....as we've known all along, it is an illegal ad and I have not seen another one like it. I just wanted to let people know, if you have questions, we have answers and if we dont have them, we will find them!
think this is a bad ad. The ad sets the tone of the conversation and the police are bringing up sex explicitly on the outset. This is a good entrapment case. I would never have charged the case with an ad like this.
Well I wonder if anyone has ever seen a case like this one. I won't go explicitly into details but I'll give my family member's case in a nutshell as it's very interesting. In his case he was on a site that is undoubtedly made for sex, and the websites Terms and Conditions, User Agreement etc. state that's the sole purpose for the site. The detective made an ad of an 18 year old. And here's where it gets interesting, the website asks "looking for" and the detective specifically chose "1-on-1-sex" (which there were a couple non-sexual options to choose from), that they're looking to give/want "oral", that "anything goes" and that they're disease free, mind you; you don't HAVE to choose these things. I, and everyone else I've talked to has never seen a case as this one. The inducement is very blatant, it's in black and white on the discovery, there doesn't need to be any interpretations, assumptions etc. it's right there in writing. I don't put anything past the state, because I know they are going to try their hardest to justify their actions but I just don't see how.They CLEARLY solicited sex, and broke their Standards no doubt about it. Also during the investigation the investigator waited until my family member asked to come over which was in the middle of the conversation to perform a bait and switch and change the age. And the whole entire website is overwhelmed in pornography. What I find weird is that, in another man's case in this same operation the police offered him gas money to come over, and they dropped the case because they saw that as inducement, I find it amazing that they don't see soliciting sex as a clear inducement. There are so many inducements in this case, it's no secret that sex is inducement, they encouraged this "crime" from the get-go, they used deceitful representation, they offered an award. Our lawyer just filed a motion to dismiss about a week and a half ago, and we're very anxious to see the state's response. So, what do you think interesting or not?
sounds like an Adult Friend Finder type ad which I have heard about LEO's using that site, but not in Florida. AFF is also a paid site if I am not mistaking which would mean you have to actually have a credit card ,etc. As far as I am concerned, this is nothing short of egregious if someone is caught using sites like these
if that is the case, i would be pushing the prosecutor to dismiss the charges. Put some pressure on them for a change. The Gennette case is now legal precedent which should help in that situation. Also let me more precise in my last post.....I have not seen another ad like the "hot latina" ad on Craigslist.
No it wasn't Adult Friend Finder. But yea that's why we're doing the motion to dismiss lol but I get what you're saying. If for some reason it does end up going to trial the jury has no choice but to acquit because the facts are clear. They did get a subpoena for his cell phone and he does have ADULTS in his phone, so I'm thinking they may try to pull the usual "we have evidence of child pornography" crap, for predisposition purposes. We'll have to wait and see but we're so anxious. It's ridiculous that he's still being prosecuted though. By the way, we've already told our lawyer that they may try to pull that stunt, any opinion on what would be the best defense for that if they do? I know case law states predisposition must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
what county was it in? but I agree, that is absurd. I am sure our helpful former prosecutor attorney would agree if i were to ask him. In fact, he has been very open and helpful and continually answers any questions I have for him even though I am fully aware of some cases he prosecuted I felt were unjust. But even then, his reasoning was justifiable. I guess what I am getting at is that we appreciate any help we can get as long as it is open, honest and sincere and that seems to be the case! I also hit Charlie Crist's Facebook up with a message explaining things to him. It might be a good idea to follow suit just to let him know that there are people concerned and not just myself
Ok I know I have talked with Talkn Stang but I cant remember who the other one was that I was talking with through email about my friends case. If you could email me again I have some information from him what happened with his case today. Don't want to say to much on here cause they know more about him then he thought they did.
https://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/fraudnet.cgi Here is another site to go to I am not sure what you all can do with this but it is another place to start reporting to as well.
Thanks Talkn Stang like I said I am not giving up I am continuing to look for all possible avenues that we can use in this fight against these unjust stings
well i am trying to contact the TOP ICAC brass within the DOJ right now. With any bit of luck i'll hear back from him.....if not, i have his phone number, lol
Here's info you can use for the above link in a complaint against the North Florida ICAC: Federal Grant #:2012-MC-FX-K014 Recipient Account #: 115-180-X647-1630
North Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force City of Gainesville PO Box 490 Station 6 Gainesville, FL 32601 Alisa Tolbert - Grants Funds Coordinator for City of Gainesville tolbertal@cityofgainesville.org 352 334-5034
Detective John Madsen Internet Crimes Against Children Commander Gainesville Police Department 413 NW 8th Avenue Gainesville, Florida 32601
wow, i didn't realize the article i wrote nearly 1.5yrs ago made it to this newspaper as well. Of course they printed the butchered down version http://www.citizen-times.com/article/DP/20120905/OPINION/309050038/
i wanted to repost this story although Carrie Coons was never to be heard from other than this. This story should serve as a reminder of why we do what we do. We need more support, we have to spread the word, and we need reform. I have been following this website closely and I have to say all of the comments and stories are really an example as to how corrupt and crooked these internet stings really are. My son graduated from high school last May - May of 2011 and turned 18 the next month in June. In October, we moved to Tallahassee so he can pursue his major at FSU and one week later my son was arrested in one of these stings. Since then, he sees a therapist every week for his anxiety which has come in tremendous amounts, and also because at the time, we did not know he had been struggling with his sexual identity and who he was, and this "investigator" or "member of law enforcement" was the first person he had ever shared these feelings with. The ad that he had replied to on "Craigslist" was "I'm tired of hiding who I am." The description read, "I'm tired of living a lie." So you would think that behind that would be someone who had been struggling with their sexuality and would be in the same situation as he was...NOT. My son was lured and trapped into this, he trusted someone who he thought was in the same situation as he was and was going through the same thing. Even our public defender told us that in the emails, the investigator had initiated each segment of the conversation and lured into coming over to this supposed "house," where they pulled him over BEFORE he even got there and TOOK HIM to this house in another neighborhood. To make things more difficult, my son is adopted (not the bad part, believe me) and he became in contact with his biological family last Christmas who lives here in Tallahassee and wouldn't you know it - were all in law enforcement, and his biological "uncle" was the arresting officer and was the one who pulled him over and took him to this house...and you can bet, they have cut off all contact with him. Since last October, my son is now 19 and can only go to work, see his therapist and come home. He has yet to start college,(he was already out one semester because of being an out-of-state student) and his anxiety stays through the roof. Just the other night, he heard a helicopter flying over our house and thought it was them coming after him again...which might sound like a little much, but believe me, the mental anguish that he and our family are under has been enormous. Just think to yourself, living and struggling with your sexual identity, trusting someone who you thought was in the same situation as you were and then being "outed" to your family like this.
Jczcoons July 10, 2012 4:47 PM (sorry, I ran out of space...this is continued with the comment above)
He wants nothing more than to move on from this nightmare and we want just that for him and believe me... I know who I raised and I did not raise a pedophile. He doesn't have access to his Facebook account but I look at it from time to time and see numerous posts on his wall of support for him, not to mention the letters we have recieved from his friends from high school and even former employers, which we have given to our public defender. His therapist is on our side 100% and even she agrees that he is NOT pedophile or predator material. She even has written a letter for the prosecutor saying that he is not what they're trying to make him out to be.
As for his case, we have had multiple case managements and we are set for a trial on 8-20 but our public defender told us when we met with him last week that he believes it will be continued because they aren't finished with their investigation supposedly. I am telling you all now who ever is reading this, I KNOW WHO I RAISED! And believe me he is not a pedophile. Just think to yourself, being someone having to confront your family about your struggles with your sexual identity in a way like this, just because you trusted someone and were lured in this crooked investigation and made out to be someone you're entirely not. And, on top of that, his biological family - has cut off all contact with him! What a way to lose a relationship that you had been waiting for your entire life in a way like this. I am ready to fight and my son is ready to fight, and I am more than willing to get into contact with anyone who would like to form a united front, per say - to show that this was a complete trap and that they can not be ruining people's lives like this. I noticed above the mention of contacting the ACLU - and I will be more than willing to assist in any possible way I can in forming this united front, showing that we are going to FIGHT! and we are NOT GOING TO GIVE UP! Like I said before, I know who I raised and he is not pedophile material. I loved him then, and I love him now through it all, he is MY son and HELL HATH NO FURY WHEN IT COMES TO PROTECTING MY SON! My email address is ccoons229@bellsouth.net - and to the creator of this website, I know we exchanged emails once already, but let me know of any specific information you might need on your side and I will get it to you as soon as possible, and I am willing to do anything for you and anyone else. Again, to all of you in this same situation, we can NOT give up! WE CAN DO THIS!
which is completely opposite than what she 1st said and that is unfortunate. Will anybody truly be every to put all of it behind them? I seriously doubt I will even be able to put it behind myself and I've beat my case. Doing nothing is not any solution like i said and it is sad that others won't join in when they know good and well we are putting up a fight.
Something really troubles me about a very serious matter.....and that is what happened yesterday in Colorado. How many more kids are going to have to die as a result of a school shooting before America figures it out? Instead of implementing worthless programs like Operations SafeChildhood that do very little to combat the real online predator issue, how about a Operation SafeSchoolYard instead so no more children have to perish as the hands of a crazed gunman. Wouldn't that make sense? But senseless is a much better way to describe our government. It is ridiculous anymore.
here is how my case went down from beginning to end:
- I was arrested and charged with 4 crimes i didnt commit - I had an entrapment motion that trial judge wrongfully denied - State then dropped 3 charges and left me with unlawful use of 2-way communication device in the commission of a felony (an unrelated charge) - I took plea since i would not get prison time but reserved my right to appeal the denial of entrapment (no SO probation) - I was sentenced to 3 yrs probation with the 1st yr community control. - At sentencing, trial judge denied my motion to set appellate bond - I filed notice of appeal, and also appealed the appellate bond denial as well - Appellate bond issues proceed faster than appeals and the DCA ruled trial judge should grant bond since I qualified. - 6 months after i was on community control, trial judge reversed his denial of appellate bond so i was free of my sentence of community control until appeal was final (even if i were imprisoned, i would have been out) - some 10 months after that, the DCA rules entrapment in my favor and in November issues the mandate on my case after the DCA denied the states motions for rehearing and rehearing en banc. - on Dec. 4, 2013, the trial judge, on order from the DCA, vacated my sentence and conviction. I am a free man - CASE CLOSED.
It is all about how you tackle your case and there are times that attorney's do not take the right approach for whatever reason. The harder you fight it, the better the odds and there's a case of Pimentel that Aladdin4d just made me aware of where you can tell the attorney fought like mad all the way til the end and eventually won at trial!
Stang This is motivational. I hope to bring this to the attention of my attorney. He is fighting hard but I believe this will be more ammo to our arsenal. - Danny Pasicolan
Something significant to note about this case - this lawyer did not call the defendant to testify during the trial and I do not think he called any defense witnesses. He won this case strictly on his interrogation of the state's witnesses.
I have just uploaded the Justin Morgan transcripts. This was a case where the lawyer was not allowed to use entrapment and still won Not Guilty on 2 out of the 3 charges (other charge was appealed). I would like to encourage anyone else with transcripts to upload to share best practices.
Yes, Mr. Aiken won that case because he was aggressive and viscous! He grilled the hell out of them and you could just tell through the transcript, that he was having none of the bullshit WHATSOEVER. That's what you need for these cases, and in general. And it was risky that he didn't claim entrapment, but he still got the job done.
Actually he did claim entrapment. Much of his closing argument was about predisposition and inducement. During Voir Dire most of his questions were about entrapment or entrapment related issues.
I actually know Christian Pimentel, we went to high school together, and were in the same sting, we're not really "friends" but if I see him we speak. Yes, his lawyer did a great job, he told me his lawyer was a family friend. I remember seeing him on a visit to see the PO not too long after the operation and he told me he was getting his car back, and getting his bracelet removed. He said he was gonna fight, and that he did, and won.
I think it's ridiculous that virtually everything the attorney tried was denied including two motions for judgement of acquittal and the jury STILL returned a not guilty verdict. When that happens it shows at least some of the motions had to have been improperly denied.
There is apparently no recourse for any piss-poor decision judges make like that case and mine in particular. The only checks of judicial power that would make a difference are those checks at the ballot box.
Has anyone heard of instances where the police did not keep a record of the CL ad they posted? This has happened in my case and I'm wondering how that might affect the state's position….
if they don't have the ad that you responded to, then your attorney should rip that to pieces in order to have your case tossed. There are cases tossed for lack of evidence
absolutely. Lack of probable cause, lack of evidence, entrapment, evidence tampering, manufacuring evidence etc, etc, etc but you have to be able to prove it.
there are numerous ways of defeating these stings now, you just have to figure out the best approach(s) that fits your case and fight like hell without letting up
For those who have beaten their cases (dismissal/acquital) have you found it possible to sanitize your online reputation so that records of your arrest are removed from the web?
I have found that this is one of the biggest obstacles to finding employment and protecting an otherwise unblemished reputation. From the news articles of the arrest to these damned mugshot websites it's so easy for anyone to learn about the arrest. Reputation.com has quoted $3000 for them to do this, but I'm sure most of us are short on that kind of cash as our lawyers have gotten what we can give to work to defend us.
Anyone have any experience with a method that works that doesn't cost thousands of $?
i have successfully opted-out from some of these sites for free, but they can be a pain in the butt and not all of them are free. I believe there is a new law or something that legislators were discussing on this subject. Now that is if you won your case and you have the options of removing it for free. As far as expungement, that information is provided on the FDLE website and does incur a 75$ fee. You can still have your case expunged if you meet the requirements on the FDLE website. That would make it easier to removed personal info from sites like florida.arrests.org, etc mugshots.com is not so easy. They are pig bastards
it's pretty sad when we cannot get that many signatures on the petition. It has been out there for over a year which is less than 1 signature per day. http://www.change.org/petitions/florida-gov-scott-dept-of-justice-us-congress-pres-of-the-us-pardon-all-people-arrested-and-coviction-of-internet-sex-stings
Just signed the petition.. There are just 236 signatures.. People share it on fb amount friends and families please so that number can go up at least double.
you know, when I get emails like this, it really reassures that everything we do is worthwhile....this one is a tough one to swallow, but people have to keep the faith.....(i took out names for obvious reasons) Hi Trey, Hope everything is well. First I like to thank you in everything you have help me, you have know idea to what extent .
I consider myself very positive about every aspect of life. But our family has been through a lot, in 2010 my husband and I ere involved in a carbon monoxide accident in what use to be our house of ten years. We later lost the house because of all the fines from the city and hospital bills. In 2011 Jonathan gets trouble with this sting and to top it all in 2012 my elder son has an accident in (a city) when he driving and looks at gps and stops short in the red light another car hits him and crashes and kills a little girl. My older son is in jail for DUI manslaughter (he had smoke pot the evening before technically very low as per his drug test) he has a lawyer that is jerk which does not give us any information and has prolong the case forever.
You gave me hope when I had no hope not only for (sons) case but inspired me to obtain a new lawyer for older son .
So even if we do not advance yet with (sons) case I want thank you from the bottom of my heart for given me the encouragement I needed to move on.
this sting arrest was another atrocity that never should have been prosecuted after I reviewed the info that I received. More injustice at the hands of law enforcement. Fortunately he didn't score prison, but years of probation coupled with registration forever is unacceptable. Only the devil would do such things to people! We are fighting the devil.
Literally, we are. The devil shows his face everyday and comes from all different backgrounds of people. Unfortunately the people we are supposed to respect to the highest standards, and who are supposed to protect us from CRIME, is doing the devils work.
Michael Lee's oral arguments are today. He had a motion to dismiss that was obviously granted and his case was won at trial phase. Not sure, but it was probably an entrapment case that the state is appealing. Hopefully this will be the 2nd appellate court victory that we are aware of although we have not heard from this guy His sting was Operation SpiderWeb.
looks like we have two more entrapment case that were won, but didn't show on our reports. Hopefully we can get more information on these 2 cases ASAP. 1 case was mandated and the other the state withdrew the appeal
hi all,my son was the one who answered the ad hot latina for no strings attached w4m add,he first was scared into taking a plea by his former pd,blair boyd,we took back the plea,and went to trial,he had 2charges,but upon the first day of trial prosecutor kathy ray added a third charge,its same as first one,the jury was sent out more than in court,they were there from 8am to 9pm,only in court room about 3hours total,we could see they were very done with the case by 1pm,they had already decided they were not comming back the next day,so they found my son guilty in less than 45monutes,which we knew before they were sent out.my son got 63months prison time,and 1year sex offender probation and lifetime registry,this has been horrible,we dont have our own home,we have a residence from my husbans job,and since my son has gotten all the crap on tv,he is known now,the other ones who live around here do not want my son here,so he would have no where to live ,even if he was out waiting on his appeal,which was started in june,and has been extended until january now due to court records not being sent to appeals lawyer.every month since june ,the court has failed to sent records to appeals lawyer,my son will not see his kids for a very long time,these 2 kids miss him terribly,his 2year old dont remember him now,his autistic daughter is slowly forgetting him,he beggs us constantly to let him come home,he still does not understand why hes in prison,he was found competant with stipulations in court,but non of this matters,he dont know why hes being punished,it tears my heart out every time be crys and begs to come home,we have done everything we have gotten advice on from this blog,but i see nothing i can do to help him understand this.yes our lives have been forever destroyed,no fixing this ever,how do you fix something that you are fighting to fix,but time is truly against you?every single day hes in prison his children forget him a little more every day,he spent his birthday ,thanksgiving and now christmas in there,we cannot afford christmas for these kids,we are in debt for the lawyer we hired and all the fines,gps fees,etc,we know this will be a very sad holiday for alot of the families that this horrid sting crap has also touched,we are still fighting,but i have seriuos health issues at this time and cannot continue at the pace i did,i will fight as best my health will allow,i will continue to do what i can to free my son and everyone elses too.thank you stang,and aladin,without you two none of us would have any hope.merry christmas to all,
There should be some type of rule that prosecutors can't add charges whenever they please. How can someone walk in the day of the trial/hearing and say they've added another charge, meanwhile that gives the defense absolutely no time to defend it. That's bullshit.
Have you been in touch with M. Ford about things? if not, you need to communicate with her ASAP to ensure what exactly is going on with appeal. It is important to know, trust me. I was not aware that that was the ad he had responded to and it really ticks me off to no end. Anyway, i know it is really hard coping with things but somehow you have to find a way to be strong. Let me tell you, even if anyone wins their case the damage was already done and I find myself facing eviction and have already had the notice plastered on my door thanks to others who have put me in this situation. But I think about those guys have been wronged way worse and that makes things not seem so bad although being homeless is not something i want to face once again. This is the reality for many of those arrested in stings unfortunately. Do I think things will change? absolutely.....i wouldn't be here and neither would anyone else if we thought otherwise, but this kind of change is not easy and it is hard finding support......we plug away at it day in and day out because it is the right thing to do! Attack that damn AD
lets discuss these ads. There are many types obviously, but we want to look at the suggestive ones like the "Hot Latina" or "2 Sisters". I feel these type ads are not being attacked appropriately. These type ads are clearly setting up the "bait and switch" If you defeat the ad, you win your case. Remember, they can only provide the opportunity! When they post something suggestive, that is also implanting the idea into the mind of an innocent person since most men are found not predisposed. Now there are a lot of ads that are the "daddy, teacher" type ads and those are a bit more challenging even though it was in an adult section. Those cases will typically boil down to the chats..well even the suggestive ones will too. Unfortunately, the courts have allowed LEO's to post in adult arenas although appellate courts seem to question them in the Gennette case...." Apparently this type of general advertisement is a common practice by law enforcement agents, who later suggest illegal activity to those who respond to the ad." It is this kind of common practice that needs to be made uncommon and it is this common practice that we need to stop.
You're right, all that needs to be proven is the sexual solicitation from police then everything else falls into perspective, or at least that's what I'm hoping. In my case the inducement/encouragement definitely can't be disputed, it's there for everyone to see I just hope the court doesn't try to write that off and go only by the chats. And remember the ONLY two instrumentalities meant for this to be a crime is ANYTHING sexual, and a minor. So if you can prove the sexual connotation then the only other thing left to prove is the detective changed their age, and that shouldn't be too hard.
here's a link to the jury instructions on most of the related charges. I you take your case to trial, i would want to know these https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BzLomEB8bi2PU2hxa2IwaExmT2M&usp=sharing
i want to remind people about the possibility of having a charge(s) dismissed after being incarcerated. Here is the info I asked on AVVO.com nearly 2 weeks ago.........this is good news because i think this would change a lot of sentences.
the reason that hankinson allowed the third charge is because our lawyer was going for no pre-disposition,and after the state was also allowed to say 3tiny 3second clips on his iphone was suspected child porn also on the day of trial,threw the defense into the mud,by the way it was not cp,it was 3clips of adult porn,which the lawyer found on a porn site and showed to kathy ray,it was not allowed in,just the 3tiny clips,it made my son look like a child molester,the state knew their case was weak,so added the evtra charge and the cp to it to geta conviction,which thanks to hankinson they got,i also blame our lawyer,she thought state would be fair,what a damn joke,she played into states game and lost,our son is paying for that now,we have no more money for a new lawyer,we must put our sons future in appeals court hands,also we would be homelss if not for my husbands job.everything that took place on trial day was very wrong,there was no fair anything,the judge denied every thing the lawyer tried,its all in the records,we cannot afford to go buy copies,it would cost well over 200.00 so we cant get them.
Have you talked with the appellate attorney yet? We already know who it is, but it is up to you to communicate with her. Give her my name and number if need be so we can help.....that is if she is willing to listen. We know what it takes to win these cases, it is just a matter of implementing a great strategy. This is where most cases are lost in my opinion. As far as effectuating change, right now we seem to be at a brick wall. We dont have the support....we need larger players since we are just pawns in this game of chess. A good indicator of this the blog. It's the same people posting over and over. If we wait on the courts for change, it is going to be a long drawn out process. WE DON"T HAVE THE SUPPORT, and I have no clue what anyone is even doing. We are disorganized and few!
Scared momma We went through that in August with hankinson he denied everything and favored the state. We were not slowed our expert witness psychiatrist or the Vidio of Tyler's arrest. They are crooked there we filed for indigency for Tyler so we could get transcripts for free waiting on them now. Hankinson made mistakes! He and Kathy Ray are heartless keep fighting!
For those of you in Tallahassee who want to fight, call or go talk to Andy Alcock of WCTV but let me know if you are going to do this. Trust me on this one. Once again, that is Andy Alcock of WCTV. Bug the hell out of him if need be......i promise you that he will listen.
So i went to AVVO.com ,as I usually do, to seek answers to questions I might have. As I stated before, WE NEED MORE SUPPORT, and it is just not there. I stand by my statement that we are a disorganized mess with nobody knowing exactly what anyone is doing. In military terms they call this a "CHARLIE FOXTROT". There is no organization and no structure. Now we can just leave this as a blog for those whoever want to post things from time to time at their leisure and that's fine with me, but if anyone thinks that that will ever bring about change, well that would be incorrect. So back to the AVVO topic, i asked the question of what it is going to take for change? Here is the link to a response http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/in-regards-to-the-numerous-florida-sting-operation-1529293.html Get it together Due-pro....i am beyond frustrated!
i feel you, believe me. Although there is a goal, there is no plan to achieve it and that is the problem. I'm getting tired of beat this dead horse. If i can't get others to follow up on some of the things I have done then we might as well throw in the towel and doing that would be unacceptable. I don't have all the answers, but one thing is for sure, something has to change.
Oral arguments for a sting related appeal were heard by the 5th DCA on 12/17/2013. The case is State v Michael R Lee and his case was dismissed at the trail level and the State is appealing that dismissal. They are attempting to broaden the scope of 847.0135(3)(a) and 847.0135(4)(a). More details and a video of the oral arguments are available on Stop the Insanity
i don't think the state will win. They are WAY OVERREACHING now, but should that be a surprise to anyone? There is no way that the legislative intent of those statutes meant that LEO's could embark on a Craigslist crusade to arrest every man with impure thoughts responding to their bogus ads. So for the state to suddenly use the term "intermediary" to stir things up a bit is preposterous! If somehow it is reversed, we are in a whole hell of a lot of POO-POO and I would suggest that people start making some noise. There is not enough being done and it seems as if people are fine with the way their cases are proceeding!
My friend that Danny Pasicolan is me. That is how I sign my comments. In regard to my last comment I wanted to say that I'm glad that there are some cases out there that are making it to trial and winning. -> Danny Pasicolan
i would appreciate it that if i post a suggestion on here, that people please follow thru with it.....and then let me know that you followed thru with it please, thank you
This is stuff I like to do, find intellectual sites and spread the word. I already have a follower who writes on child solicitation. https://independent.academia.edu/TalknStang
God Bless you and your son Jenn. It does seem unreal. Like a bad dream we cannot awaken from...but hang in there! We're still fighting the good fight on appeal!
Ok people.....i got some very interesting news in regarding the DOJ. . It appears that we have been filing complaints to the wrong dept. within the DOJ, which we kinda figured since we have not had much success. But someone has apparently and we now know where complaints need to be filed to and here is the link and an email address to the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice. http://www.justice.gov/criminal/about/contact.html Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov Take 5 minutes out of your time and write a simple message about these illegal sting operations. When done, please let me know or post on the blog that you have filed the complaint so we can kinda keep track of them. So yes, someone did get a call from the Dept. of Justice but no, we cannot get into that. Just please file this complaint. Trust us on this one. Thanks everyone.
I just sent a very detail message about all this. Hope they hear us out. People we need to send as many as we cant so they can take steps to look into this.
Take a good look at these two links. WTF? They didn't have enough money to purchase surveillance gear in Red Cheeks so they cried to the public and suckered them into donating it. WTF? Also, when you look at the stings DATA sheet on Red Cheeks. There were at least 6 cases tossed.....6. That stinks to high heavens to me. Wouldnt you think that if there is collaboration between agencies, instead of suckering the public any more than they already do, maybe they could share equipment? I am sure there is enough gear around at any given time where they could loan it to another ICAC etc, but to scam the public into donating their money for an illegal operation is pathetic.
excellent....great job peeps. Several of us also called the FBI and put in a complaint. I think we are on the right track. If anyone wants to call the number is 2023243000. Choose option 1, and option 1 again. The lady will take your name and number. Just inform them of ICAC violations and that you were informed from a DOJ complaint to contact them. Now WE are doing some collaborating, lol Now I am going to stir up some interest with my media contacts and clue them in on a few things
I wanted to file a complaint on my behalf to the Dept. of Justice in regards to illegal/unlawful arrests being made while multiple law enforcement agencies conduct illegal sting operations here in Florida. I am living proof that what they are doing is wrong since I was found to be entrapped by a district court of appeals that reversed an illegal conviction. My life was destroyed and my name was dragged through the gutter because LEO's cannot simply follow the rules. Violating ICAC procedure is grounds for revoking funding and this is what needs to happen followed by a complete shutdown of these operations pending an investigation. If you are not aware, this has happened with an ICAC task force in NW Georgia after violations of procedure were made public. That investigation is still pending. It is only fair for the DOJ to do the right thing and stop this unnecessary problem. Ultimately, the DOJ is responsible since they are funding these operations, although they might not be aware of these violations perhaps due to falsifying reports required by ICAC agencies to be submitted on a quarterly basis. Please stop this madness. As a war veteran, I served my country well but in return, my country did not do the same. I did not deserve what happened to me, nor did other innocent men who havn't been as fortunate as I have to win their case. (and I use the term "fortunate" very loosely|) I am asking for help. Below is a link to an article that i wrote that explains in detail where, how and why this problem exists. Thank you
i am liking what i am seeing people. I am getting emails, txt msgs calls from those who are filing complaints. This makes me happy, lol Spread the word.....we just can't stop at today though. We have to follow up on these complaints soon and keep on plugging away at things. Good job
Thats right, arrest those bad guys...good job LEO's...its about time you got the right ones http://www.wfla.com/story/24265130/tampa-police-officer-fired-accused-of-having-sex-with-teen
A real crime because there was a REAL minor. Note that the perp was an adult with influence over her, in a position of power, and who knew her personally. This is how is happens in most cases, in "the real world!"
http://governingus.com/ i am trying out this new blogger that has been created for US. We might be slowly migrating there in time. Information should be easier to manage this route so if you want to go ahead and create user accts. go for it......i approve, lol
Snure & Ponall, P.A. | Florida Bar Board Certified Criminal Defense Attorneys | Orlando/Winter Park, Florida
http://www.snureponall.com
Ex Parte John Christopher Lo vs. Texas, NO. PD-1560-12, (Court of Appeals, October 30, 2013)
“The Government may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech.
Protected speech does not become unprotected merely because it resembles the latter. The Constitution requires the reverse.”
This rule reflects the judgment that “[t]he possible harm to society in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished is outweighed by the possibility that protected speech of others may be muted[.]”...
Free Speech Coalition tells us that a ban upon constitutionally protected speech may not be upheld on the theory that
“law enforcement is hard,”
and the State may not punish speech simply because that speech increases the chance that
“a pervert” might commit an illegal act “at some indefinite future time.”...
That last statement above says it all "MIGHT COMMIT an illegal act at some INDEFINITE future time.
This TX case is similar to:
Jeffery L. Cashatt v. State of Florida, 873 So. 2d 430 (2004)
…sexually oriented communication on a computer on-line service which is viewed by a child is not a violation of the statute unless the sender of the communication “knowingly” attempts by the communication to seduce the child.
but goes even further to explain why. I.e. It is not illegal to respond to obvious solicitations from a "minor" even with obvious solicitations because it was NEVER YOUR INTENT TO SEDUCE BUT IT WAS THEIRS. The consensual nature of the stings and the way they are obviously looking for sex MAKES ANY SPEECH RESPONDING TO THE FAKE SCENARIO PROTECTED SPEECH because the targets DO NOT KNOWINGLY attempt to seduce but merely respond to a wanted and willing solicitation.
Thus, THIS CASE CAN BE USED WITH THE SUPREME COURT PRECEDENCE IN IT along with some FL cases to prove that THE METHODS USED IN THESE STINGS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND FREE SPEECH!
"33.021(c) A person commits an offense if the person, over the Internet, by electronic mail or text message or other electronic message service or system, or through a commercial online service, knowingly solicits a minor to meet another person, including the actor, with the intent that the minor will engage in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, or deviate sexual intercourse with the actor or another person."
What was struck down was 33.021(b) which had absolutely nothing to do with solicitation.
everyone read and re-read all this carefully, ask me to clarify if it doesn't make sense; i know the law can appear confusing and vague:
847.0135 LEGAL INTERPRETATION:
i've mentioned this before about focusing on 847.0135's use of "knowingly" with "consent to participation of" or "to commit" 794, 800, 827. in florida statutes: legislators use the words "knowingly" and "solicit" "lure" "entice" "seduce" contingent on garnering a minor to "commit" or parent/legal guardian/"custodian" to "consent to the participation". this translates to a premeditated intent to persuade unlawful activity and is the objective of a predator. the way the statute is provided, it criminalises someone who is taking consciously seeking to take the "the offensive" or leading role in a conversation (of non-sexual origin) to direct a minor or parent/guardian/"custodian" of a minor's mindset/intent from a legal or neutral context/topic/nature (non-sexual origin/topic; not originating from a sex/adult/dating personals/chat) with what would begin as an unwilling minor or parent/"custodian" of a minor (not expressing sexually overtness or promiscuous, readiness to commit) to convince/persuade/influence them into an illegal context and activity. this is called "grooming", which is a step beyond expressing or reciprocating interest. a defendant's sexual interest in the minor is not criminalised; only when they try to manipulate a minor into a sexual arrangement.
INVALID 847.0135 APPLICATION:
when law officers post a sexual solicitation on a casual sex or adult personals/meeting service, posing as a willing minor or adult & minor posting an adult advertisement under the guise of an adult, they are 1) falsely advertising and 2) setting the context/tone/topic and 3) expressing their consent to or readiness to commit which is understood by anyone approaching/interacting with them, and they are doing the soliciting/luring/enticing/seducing. their own illegal suggestive solicitation and readiness expressing/confirming consent is not a result or response from any "soliciting" "luring "enticing" "seducing" from the defendant. so i'm not convinced 847.0135 has been violated.
uncriminalised scenario: minor in a suggestive/sexual adult setting approaches or advertises herself as a promiscuous girl, ready to sex it up, to which the deft responds to expressing interest.
criminalised scenario: defendant approaches a minor in a neutral, mixed-age setting, and convinces her to have sex with him.
law enforcement knows the stereotypical image of predators' "grooming" and goes out of their way to non-nonchalantly request some guys to bring typical items the general population associates with "grooming" (candies, gifts) or "partying" (booze, condoms). when it's questioned why or presented that their solicitation occurred on a casual sex site, they lie, suppress, downplay, and/or attempt to justify their original presence or solicitation because it'd put their stings in peril.
also, it's unconstitutional for the prosecution dictating a defendant's belief or intent or interpretation for him without an outright confession, or investigation on him to reveal known propensities, even if you raised entrapment, allowing the state to dictate a deft's thoughts has nothing to do with "viewing the situation in light most favourable to the state", because if it did, you'd lose every time. gennette's case illustrates this issue a bit. without an investigation i'm not sure what the prosecution/judges are defining as what a defendant believes.
doesn't allow police decoys; there must be a real minor, and her age must be proven to the court. doesn't matter if you agreed and "attempted" (should be conspired in adult mediator cases) to have sex with a police decoy minor whether directly or via an adult decoy; this statute not applicable bc it doesn't provide for law enforcement decoys.
800.04 - Completed offenses do require an actual minor however no one is charged with a completed 800.04 offense during a sting operation, they are charged with criminal attempt of an underlying offense. The State doesn't have to prove the elements of the underlying offense. If they did, criminal attempt wouldn't exist. Instead they have to prove the elements of criminal attempt which are unique to criminal attempt and completely different than any underlying offense. The question of whether or not criminal attempt requires an actual minor like a completed has already been addressed in Florida case law and the answer was no. The Pamblanco opinion explicitly stated it did not address criminal attempt so nothing has changed. This is why despite Pamblanco many 800.04 charges are sticking.
847.0135 provides two areas for police decoys, stating
"The fact that an undercover operative or law enforcement officer was involved in the detection and investigation of an offense under this subsection shall not constitute a defense to a prosecution under this subsection."
800.04 has no such provisions. the judicial branch can't conjure up the law as they see fit; statutory interpretation is to be construed in favour of the deft, anyway. 777.04 has nothing to do with allowing police decoys. 777.04(1/attempt) addresses intent similar to 847.0135:
"Criminal attempt includes the act of an adult who, with intent to commit an offense prohibited by law, allures, seduces, coaxes, or induces a child under the age of 12 to engage in an offense prohibited by law.".
800.04 & 847.0135 "A PERSON BELIEVED TO BE" & "ANOTHER PERSON BELIEVED BY THE PERSON" CLAUSES
aside from the issue of dictating a person's belief for him is a more immediate issue: the "a person to be believed" and "another person believed by the person to be a child" clauses do not exist in 800.04 like it does in 847.0135; my analysis is that 847.0135's "a person to believed to be" and "another person believed by the person to be a child" does not convey the same meaning as 800.04's "perpetrator’s ignorance of the victim’s age" or "victim's misrepresentation of his or her age" or "the perpetrator’s bona fide belief of the victim’s age".
the way i interpret the 847.0135 clause's language is it seems to allow people to misrepresent their identity--police decoys--whereas 800.04 seems to only allow a real minor to lie about their age as being an adult age, to which the adult being lied to is essentially held responsible and culpable for not verifying this and believing the minor. this is what happened in munoz. also the "believed" parts are limited; there must be a real child involved in some capacity read the following, and focus on where "believed to be" is and isn't:
·847.0135(3a/4a): "(attempt to) seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or another person believed by the person to be a child, to (3a)commit/(4a)engage any illegal act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in any unlawful sexual conduct with a child (3a only): or with another person believed by the person to be a child;..."
·847.0135(3b/4b): "(attempt to) solicit, lure, or entice a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child or a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child to consent to the participation of such child in any act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in any sexual conduct..."
my opinion on 847.0135
only subsections 2 and 5 seem to permit more liberal undercover law enforcement involvement: "The fact that an undercover operative or law enforcement officer was involved in the detection and investigation of an offense under this section shall not constitute a defense to a prosecution under this section."
subsections 3 and 4, what we're charged with, are much more restricted than sections 2 and 5: along with what i mentioned a couple posts up about the use of the words "seduce/solicit/lure/entice" referring to intent to persuade, the use of "knowingly" "seduce/solicit/lure/entice" "to commit/consent" along with where "a child" vs "a person believed to be a child" and "a parent/guardian/custodian" vs "a "another person believed to be parent/guardian/custodian" is used significant and actually means something. i interpret this as law enforcement may only perform reactive investigations only--that means intervene in an ongoing incident, not originate one, as a real child is required in most of these subsections.
3a/4a issue: based on this "a person believed to be a child" clause, 4a is suspect to be invalid because there is no "or with another person believed by the person to be a child" like in 3a at the end which describes the actual commission stage of the incident.
so let's say in theory if a sting was catching legit predators who were intent on seeking to persuade children into sexual activity like i described in my previous post (not like in our stings), they could only be charged as far as 3a because ther was no real minor he actually attempted to meet to engage in sexual activity. this language in the statute would make sense to apply only in a reactive investigation where law enforcement assumes the role of a child already being groomed/victimised in order to intercept the pedo.
3b/4b issue: this subsection provides "a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child" instead of "a person believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a person believed to be a child".
so neither of these 3b/4b are applicable when there's no real child. the way i interpret this to be applicable is law enforcement would have to assume the role of a parent/guardian/custodian of a real child, which would make sense that this was intended to allow law enforcement to pursue a reactive investigation of a parent already abusing their child with/to other people.
800.04 doesn't provide the "a person believed to be" or "another person believed to be" clauses in any subsection. 800.04 has a provision in its definitions that addresses a minor victim misrepresenting their age, not assume another identity (e.g. police decoy) misrepresenting their age:
·800.04(3): "IGNORANCE OR BELIEF OF VICTIM’S AGE.—The perpetrator’s ignorance of the victim’s age, the victim’s misrepresentation of his or her age, or the perpetrator’s bona fide belief of the victim’s age cannot be raised as a defense in a prosecution under this section."
munoz & 800.04; responsibility of adult for verification of age
this verification of age is what munoz who was subject to be held culpable for. since law enforcement used a real minor CI, munoz was legitimately charged with the 847.012 which held him accountable for it just like 800.04--they have the same provision criminalising non-verification--but only was reversed because it was law enforcement was the one who recruited and instructed the minor to misrepresent her age and instructed and provided her the inducement for munoz to do so.
for anyone who hasn't read munoz, it's the current precedence of what entrapment is, here's munoz in a nutshell: bay county sheriffs office recruited a real sixteen-year-old confidential informant to assist law enforcement follow up on an anonymous tip that munoz's video store was renting minors adult videos. so they instructed her to lie about her age (which is statutorily permissible like in 800.04) and provided her a membership card (of a 34 year-old adult she claimed to be a girlfriend of) from munoz's store (this had the effect of inducement to munoz; trust) provided to her by police (this is where it became entrapment as a matter of law) with instructions to provide it to munoz while stating "i forgot my ID" to bypass having to verify her age with state identification to munoz to allow her purchase of adult videos; this "i forgot my ID" scenario is the basis of tobacco and alchohol sales stings. however, the court found that this use of a membership card from his store had the effect of inducing munoz (by him trusting her to be an adult as she claimed to be the girlfriend--therefore sexually involved--of the member on the membership's card which reflected him to be 34) to rent it to her and was sufficient grounds for entrapment since law enforcement provided and devised the inducement. now some asshole could say that she could have been assumed a minor sexing an adult, but in US law, you're presumed to be a law abiding citizen until proven otherwise. so i can understand the court's mentioning of the member's age as significant grounds for inducement.
another comparison of an instance of how this is inducement can be like when clubs tag minors and adults separately to indicator to the bartenders who is legal to serve without having to ID everyone.
all 777.04 is the stage or variation of the crime; i don't see any provision allowing them to modify or omit the requirements of the crime (statute) it's applied to. so i don't understand how attempt versus solicitation or conspiracy or any of this statute affects the necessity of elements of a crime it's attached to exist. further, neither provides or addresses theoretical scenarios, elements, or a target to have "believed" something to be, or "a person believed to be", or "another person believed to be", or any provision allowing law enforcement any exceptions to produce elements of a criminalising a statute, or to modify the requirement of the elements it's being applied to.
777.04: attempt, solicitation, and conspiracy.
(1) ATTEMPT:
A person who attempts to commit an offense prohibited by law and in such attempt does any act toward the commission of such offense, but fails in the perpetration or is intercepted or prevented in the execution thereof, commits the offense of criminal attempt, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4). Criminal attempt includes the act of an adult who, with intent to commit an offense prohibited by law, allures, seduces, coaxes, or induces a child under the age of 12 to engage in an offense prohibited by law.
(2) SOLICITATION (solicit):
A person who solicits another to commit an offense prohibited by law and in the course of such solicitation commands, encourages, hires, or requests another person to engage in specific conduct which would constitute such offense or an attempt to commit such offense commits the offense of criminal solicitation, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4).
(3) CONSPIRACY (conspire):
A person who agrees, conspires, combines, or confederates with another person or persons to commit any offense commits the offense of criminal conspiracy, ranked for purposes of sentencing as provided in subsection (4).
it's not within the judicidal branch's authority to dictate the law on the fly, judge janice brown essentially stated this regarding this issue in federal court with the federal statute. so basically if the law does and doesn't provide exact text to punish a situation, the judicial branch may not construe a statute unfavourably against the one being charged; this is common knowledge in the justice system though our cases are not having this practise applied.
maybe i'm delusional but i think these are legit issues.
disclaimer: i'm not a lawyer and this isnt legal advice
People only feel that their situation shames them because they let it! I'm sorry, but that i don't buy that one bit whatsoever. You can private your messages on facebook. I am sure most people's families and friends are well aware of what has happened and if they don't then this would be a good reason to inform them of the truth. The only predators are those of law enforcement who are preying on the minds of the public making them believe that they are actually doing our country some good by making these false arrests. Those who believe what LEO's say are weak-minded. Those who listen to both sides before formulating an opinion are thoughtful, and those who see things for what they truly are are informed!
I have proof that I know what I am talking about and that it works so despite what ANYONE says, from now on what I say goes!!! If you don't knowingly intend to solicit a minor for sex then regardless of what you say, you have not violated the law particularly when it is obvious that "the minor" intended to persuade you or had the intent to make you solicit them!!!
If what you say goes, consider me gone because now you're just being an asshole
Just because you have talked to attorneys does not mean that they are right. That has been part of the problem this whole time is that attorneys do not even know what they are talking about which is really sad. EVERYONE involved with the judicial system is "off track" and have no idea what the proper way to apply the law is. If they knew what the hell they were doing the shit would have never started in the first place. THE MEN BEING ARRESTED ARE NOT EVEN BREAKING THE LAW UNDER THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE F****** STATUTES! This is where the first amendment meets criminal law:
http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2013/11/another-suspect-texas-statute-33-021c.html
The proof is all these cases that are being won and the fact that attorneys are contacting us wanting to be advertised on here. That "super secret training manual" will pop up sooner or later. The person that informed us of it's existence has been gone for a bit but hopefully will be back soon.
If I seem to be coming off as an asshole it's because I am severely pissed off that the lack of action with this movement has caused one of our own to get discouraged and quit! THIS IS NOT A PISS AND MOAN FORUM NOR A DISCUSSION FORUM. This is a way to get information to see what might work and to do it. NOT to talk about why it MIGHT not work. There have been other things that have been mentioned on here that you said would not work but they have. These people are looking to us for answers and yes WE have a lot of answers. The last thing we need is to discourage them even more by being pessimistic about every little thing we find trying to convince ourselves and everyone else that it won't work or the info is not good.
Speaking of Talkn Stang, I think maybe he forgot where he came from. Had it not been for ALL OF US he would have not won his case! He might have got violated on his probation and went to prison. He did not even know what an appellate bond was had I not told him AND HIS ATTORNEY DAMN SURE DIDN'T TELL HIM!
So go ahead and trust these dumb ass attorneys if you want to but THERE IS NO REASON TO TRUST THEM until they start producing results and represent people with FULL HONESTY AND PROPER LEGAL ADVICE. Not telling a defendant about something that could mean everything with the case or minimizing a very important legal point IS NOT BEING A GOOD ATTORNEY. They are acting like you act a lot of times instead of being optimistic and TRYING EVERYTHING THEY GOT! A lot of people on here act as though the government has already won and it would take a miracle to turn things around but not on my watch. WE DON'T NEED MIRACLES! WE NEED TO DO SHIT EVEN IF WE THINK IT WON'T WORK AND TRY OUR BEST TO MAKE IT WORK!!! That's what I meant by "what I say goes" because we can "make a square peg fit into a round hole" and we don't have any room for excuses or pessimism. PUT YOUR F****** NIKES ON!!!
I am thankful for that support from this blog. I guess it is a "pay it forward" kind of thing. You help TalknStang, he helped me, we help and support each other. We do not need pessimism here. I agree with you, attorneys should at least try--put everything in front of the court, the judge, the jury and see what "sticks." Let the prosecutor object and make a case...make THEM work for a change! I have not seen prosecutors hold back anything because "it might be questionable practice" or "it might not stick." This is very much unchartered territory for many of us. I appreciate your rallying the troops!
I have written letters to DOJ without response, I have sought ACLU attention...and now that my son may be facing a retrial, and I hold a very public position at work, I have been advised by our lawyer to keep a low profile, so I will not be public, for now. I have to follow their advice. I feel bad that I cannot do more--like speak with the media. But I will continue to work behind the scenes. My son cannot access internet at all... so I have to relay this information to him. Please keep up the good fight!
The main cause of ALL of these convictions is from ineffective counsel. I am not just talking about the fact that over 95% of the convictions come from pleas but also the remaining 5% that make it to trial. THERE IS NO REASON OR EXCUSE FOR LOSING THESE CASES! If a case is lost, then it's the attorneys fault due to substandard performance and letting the system walk all over their clients. Attorneys should not be afraid to call the prosecutors and detectives liars in open court!
This blog is also not just to help the defendants but also to help the attorneys. Your attorney was only half wrong about these cases being tough because these cases can be SO EASY when the proper arguments are made and the prosecution is "kept in line" BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN REAL CRIME NOR DO THEY RESEMBLE IT. If the attorney lets the prosecution make weak assumptions, lie in open court, use inadmissible evidence like legal porn to falsify predisposition, use false and unproven statistics, and lets the detectives blatantly lie and say that they were not seeking for sex then of course the cases are hard. THIS IS A SICK, TWISTED, AND HIGHLY IMMORAL TOPIC BUT IT'S STILL ENTRAPMENT and an attorney should be walking into a case like this with that same mindset and keep that mindset until it's closed. They should forget about what society says about these men (BECAUSE SOCIETY IS BEING LIED TO) and PROVE THAT THE LAW SAYS THEY ARE INNOCENT! The information in this blog helps with this task and does prove the men are innocent. I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT ANY COP, PROSECUTOR, JUDGE OR JURY SAYS BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE AND PROOF WE HAVE IS OVERWHELMING!!! We basically are going to make them yield for fear of them "sticking their foot in their mouth". WE ARE RIGHT ABOUT THIS AND WILL NOT TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER!!!
Everything presented on here needs to be discussed including why it might not work. If you don't pay attention to why it won't work, you will NEVER win and trying to blame a loss on a judge's abuse of discretion is pointless when there is an obvious flaw in the argument and that's the real reason it failed.
Take the Texas decision. It is not a "cure all" and will be extremely difficult to apply to Florida law. When somebody tries using every point you have made it will still fail because all the State has to say is "Your Honor, Florida does not have a statute substantially similar to the one at issue in this decision and the Texas courts have expressly upheld the solicitation statute that is substantially similar to the Florida solicitation statutes." and the motion will be denied. That's what you need to defeat first before anything will ever happen and people need to know that before attempting to use this decision in any meaningful way.
Another example? Pamblanco. It took weeks of arguing before you even acknowledged Pamblanco had any importance and now you prescribe it as another "cure all" without ever bothering to tell anybody why it might not work and the reality is it doesn't work all of the time. Why not? It's not because of a judge's abuse of discretion. It's because as I've said before Pamblanco does not address lewd/lascivious charges in the context of criminal attempt and people need to know that before trying to use it in court because all the State has to do is raise Hudson v. State, 745 So. 2d 997 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 2nd Dist. 1999 and the argument is over 75% lost. That fact is something people need to know. Without addressing Hudson you are virtually guaranteed to lose.
As far as other things I've said wouldn't work on here you better be ready to provide actual PROOF to back that statement up instead of just blowing smoke. One, there's only a couple of times I have ever said something wouldn't work one of which is this Texas case and I've never said anything remotely resembling telling people not to try it. The most I have done is point out issues the State will raise to defeat the argument or current legal precedent.
You might want to think about apologizing to the attorneys linked here too. Some of them are the Dumb Ass attorneys whose opinions I've been trusting.
An area that we see as a way to help us working to keep our heads above water, add a section for transcripts. For many of us we hear about the successful cases through the blog, but if we had a collection of transcripts that could be quickly accessed, this would help so much in the time to determine if a strategy would be useful as transcripts could take 30 days to receive if you have to order them and also in keeping costs down. We have the transcripts from the Morgan trial (Citrus County – this is the one that the lawyer won not guilty on 2 of the 3 charges without the ability to argue entrapment and then on appeal the last charge was dropped because the appeal court stated that he should have been allowed entrapment), and from the Palmer trial (we only have the transcripts from the jury selection, interrogation of the primary police witness, and the closing arguments). If we can create a shared area for these and other transcripts that others may have, then this can assist with sharing the best practices for other attorneys. Also add a section to post motions. Our attorney has been able to obtain motions to review, and many of these were based on leads from the blog and others were on her knowledge of this area. Again, this would be a way to share best practices because as we know that for some counties this is very difficult to obtain and for the truly successful cases, the data may be expunged. This is what happened for the transcripts for the case Fetterman won in Citrus County.
The database is awesome, this is a huge step forward in taking this from a feeling of what was happening to facts. In my opinion, another avenue would be coordinating information to determine if there are any patterns with some of the detectives serving as chatters. Unfortunately this information will only come out from the cases that go to deposition and/or trial, but this could be useful for again documenting that there are relatively few ‘chatters’ in the state and these problems can be tied back to the procedures of the lead detectives. For example in our case, the chatting detective has admitted during the deposition that upon review he was the one that introduced sex into the texting.
Again this blog has been amazing in helping us understand the big picture. For many of us right now we are so busy trying to keep our heads above water that it is difficult to see how we can support the big picture. I agree that the new database on tracking emails and other contacts will help in understanding the efforts others may be doing to support the big picture.
http://dbinbox.com/stoptheinsanity75
Right now there is a 50 MB files size limit for uploading but that should be plenty for any document. Anything you upload will either be put in a blog post or added to the Documents Page of the Stop the Insanity blog. There is also a little more info on Uploading files available.
Ok, I agree with all the arguments to a certain extent. A REALLY big factor in winning these cases IS having the right attorney, I, I'm sure as everyone else has experienced that first hand. Someone who is understand, and willing to be your partner rather than just your lawyer is huge. I can tell you how many times I've heard "lawyers" tell me "I went to school for this not you", and "I'm the driver of this train". I'm blessed to have found someone who is understanding and takes my suggestions into consideration and actually uses them. He truly believes I'm innocent, and that's also important. We are a team. Secondly you DO have to be a realist, and think positively and unfortunately negatively as well (but more positive though lol). I'm a person of faith and I truly believe in GOD'S time, he will clean up this mess, and those who are doing this to innocent people will reap what they sow.
Now I believe lawyers aren't tackling the right defenses, and being as aggressive as they could, you have to beat the prosecutors at their own game. Smart lawyers say things they know for a fact will get objected but do you know why they say it? Just to let the judge and jurors hear it. There's a notorious lawyer where I stay (who my family hired for another family member in a different type of case) she is absolutely crazy, my family member went to trial the first time and got a hung jury, she asked "why'd you lose the last time?" we stated "we didn't lose it was a hung jury" she said "YOU LOST" lol. Few judges even like her, but her track record for winning cases is insane. Other lawyers sit in her cases just to watch her. She had the prosecutor in my family member's case QUIT when he heard we had hired her. And she doesn't have a life outside of her job. You may be thinking why I'm typing this, but what I'm getting at is she doesn't give a damn what ANYONE says about her, the woman is good (the first time she went to my cousins house, she went straight to their refridgerator lol). She's aggressive, assertive, sarcastic when she needs to be, kinda like prosecutors are in these cases. Choosing a lawyer is critical and a test in iteslf. You NEED a good understanding lawyer, point blank simple.
Now on to the statute 847.0135. I really don't understand why ppl are losing these cases left and right, well I do but...Unless YOU clearly induced, manipulated, coerced, threatened, offered a reward etc. how do you violate the statute? Now a huge problem and one I think is the root of the problem as well, is that SOMEHOW prosecutors are able to persuade the judge/jurors that they interested in sex WHATSOEVER which is bs. Basically the way I see it is that if there was any inducement, you did not violate the statute, even if you are predisposed. Like "person" said if the consent was already there, you can't solicit, seduce, lure etc. Something else needed to win these cases (and unfortunately this is out of our hands) but you need an indifferent judge. Someone who goes into these cases with an open mind. They are out there, I have one. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't belief also a factor in the statues? NO ONE can tell you what you believed unless it's clear in the messages that you did. As a matter of fact, ANYTHING the prosecutors try to assume is SPECULATION and can be objected over and over again, and should be sustained. Once again thank EVERYONE for all that they do, we aren't fighting a lost cause God WILL sort this out. But stop bickering with family it gets us nowhere!
Dear Ms.
Thank you for contacting Governor Rick Scott's Office. The Governor appreciates your concerns and asked that I respond on his behalf.
Although we appreciate your concerns, the Governor has no legal jurisdiction in criminal cases. Each state attorney is an elected official charged with certain discretionary duties, including the duty to determine whether or not to prosecute any particular crime committed within his or her jurisdiction. This decision is based on the quality and quantity of the evidence of guilt shown, and in the best interest of justice. The state attorneys operate independently of the Governor's office. As elected officials, they answer to the voters of their individual jurisdictions. Questions about guilt or innocence, or the procedural fairness of convictions must be addressed in the courts. Those who wish to contest judicial rulings may wish to speak with an attorney about what appellate procedures may be available.
You can influence legislation regarding crime and punishment, and tools used by law enforcement by contacting your local legislative delegation. You can find contact information for your legislators and track bills as they proceed through the legislative process at www.leg.state.fl.us.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact the Governor's Office.
Sincerely,
Warren Davis
Office of Citizen Services
Executive Office of the Governor
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/FBI-Gives-Inside-Look-at-World-of-Child-Predators-232198031.html#comments
also, i want to make sure that i am correct in reading the following statement DUEPRO....".I have proof that I know what I am talking about and that it works so despite what ANYONE says, from now on what I say goes!!! " Whatever you say goes? If i were you, i think i might have a little explaining to do, because i am here to tell you whatever you say does not go!
Still not sure where it is now and what happened with it
I would go to the agent that you trust the most, and make a formal request that the agent you want investigated gets investigated, and explain exactly what unethical or illegal that he or she did.
Per the Court:
-Defendant Second Motion to Dismiss is Denied -Defendant Amended Motion to Dismiss is Denied on objective of grounds of entrapment based on State's Traverse -Defense Motion to take additional Deposition on Sgt. Hanton, only to discuss as I.C.A.C.O Supervisor is Granted for 30 Minutes -Defense Motion to Compel Documentation as it pertains to departures from I.C.A.C.O by Orange County Sheriff is Denied. Defense needs to notice Orange County Sheriff Office. -State Motion in Limine to exclude Defense Expert is Granted, Defense will be given opportunity to file memorandum to dispute -Defense Motion to Compel I.C.A.C.O Manuals - Reserved Ruling, Defense needs to notice Department of Justice -Defense Motion to Compel Written Consent of Detective to disclose images - Moot State Provided images Defense Motion to Compel documentation of Deviation from I.C.A.C.O - Denied, no such documents exist -Defense Motion to Compel State Expert Training Material is Denied Defense Motion in Limine as to Paragraph 1,3,5 is Denied -As to Paragraph 2 ,Granted. -As to Paragraph 4, Granted. -As to Paragraph 6, Denied. -As to Paragraph 7, Denied. -As to Paragraph 8, as to Gambling condition, Marital Finances and Therapist and Denied in part, State to produce a redacted video consistent with the Court oral findings -As to Paragraph 9, Granted. -As to Paragraph 10, Denied. -As to Paragraph 11, Granted. -As to Paragraph 12, Granted. -As to Paragraph 13, Granted. -As to Paragraph 14, Granted. -As to Paragraph 15, Granted.
That leads to the current difference in priorities. I totally agree the number one goal should be to stop the stings period. That's the one thing that will help everybody but at the same time it's little solace to the guy that has to choose between a 10 year plea deal or go to trial next week to know that at some unknown point in the future the stings will be stopped.
People need to take care of themselves first and then help to end the stings. If any resolution to their case is 6 months out, then great, they can help working towards ending the stings while they wait. If a resolution is 6 weeks out, then they need to focus on their case, getting prepared for any consequences and nothing else. If they win, then hopefully they will start coming back here disclosing the full details of how they won so that it might help the next guy.
Anyway what I came here to post about is an Excel dump of the Sting database is now available on the documents page of the other blog.
Things to be done:
1. Finish making the attorney names uniform and linking them to an attorney table that includes contact information.
2. Provide links to the appropriate clerk of court page for each defendant.
3. The appeals table is done but the relationship and exactly what information is drawn from the appeals table needs to be established
4. Calculations - Keeping running totals of the stats we think are important.
5. Going live. This is already in progress. More details to come.
See that should put a smile on everyone's face. I truly believe that in the end everything will work itself out
http://www.sportsgrid.com/ncaa-football/alabama-fan-accused-of-craigslist-sex-15-year-old-sad-video/
Post Free Ads or get free account via Facebook Login in one click.
Get more with free advertising at postallads4free.com
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/ryan-loskarn-investigated-101016.html
think this is a bad ad. The ad sets the tone of the conversation and the police are bringing up sex explicitly on the outset. This is a good entrapment case. I would never have charged the case with an ad like this.
Cloud Hosting
Federal Grant #:2012-MC-FX-K014
Recipient Account #: 115-180-X647-1630
North Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force
City of Gainesville
PO Box 490
Station 6
Gainesville, FL 32601
Alisa Tolbert - Grants Funds Coordinator for City of Gainesville
tolbertal@cityofgainesville.org
352 334-5034
Detective John Madsen
Internet Crimes Against Children Commander
Gainesville Police Department
413 NW 8th Avenue
Gainesville, Florida 32601
http://www.citizen-times.com/article/DP/20120905/OPINION/309050038/
I have been following this website closely and I have to say all of the comments and stories are really an example as to how corrupt and crooked these internet stings really are. My son graduated from high school last May - May of 2011 and turned 18 the next month in June. In October, we moved to Tallahassee so he can pursue his major at FSU and one week later my son was arrested in one of these stings. Since then, he sees a therapist every week for his anxiety which has come in tremendous amounts, and also because at the time, we did not know he had been struggling with his sexual identity and who he was, and this "investigator" or "member of law enforcement" was the first person he had ever shared these feelings with. The ad that he had replied to on "Craigslist" was "I'm tired of hiding who I am." The description read, "I'm tired of living a lie." So you would think that behind that would be someone who had been struggling with their sexuality and would be in the same situation as he was...NOT. My son was lured and trapped into this, he trusted someone who he thought was in the same situation as he was and was going through the same thing. Even our public defender told us that in the emails, the investigator had initiated each segment of the conversation and lured into coming over to this supposed "house," where they pulled him over BEFORE he even got there and TOOK HIM to this house in another neighborhood. To make things more difficult, my son is adopted (not the bad part, believe me) and he became in contact with his biological family last Christmas who lives here in Tallahassee and wouldn't you know it - were all in law enforcement, and his biological "uncle" was the arresting officer and was the one who pulled him over and took him to this house...and you can bet, they have cut off all contact with him. Since last October, my son is now 19 and can only go to work, see his therapist and come home. He has yet to start college,(he was already out one semester because of being an out-of-state student) and his anxiety stays through the roof. Just the other night, he heard a helicopter flying over our house and thought it was them coming after him again...which might sound like a little much, but believe me, the mental anguish that he and our family are under has been enormous. Just think to yourself, living and struggling with your sexual identity, trusting someone who you thought was in the same situation as you were and then being "outed" to your family like this.
Jczcoons July 10, 2012 4:47 PM
(sorry, I ran out of space...this is continued with the comment above)
He wants nothing more than to move on from this nightmare and we want just that for him and believe me... I know who I raised and I did not raise a pedophile. He doesn't have access to his Facebook account but I look at it from time to time and see numerous posts on his wall of support for him, not to mention the letters we have recieved from his friends from high school and even former employers, which we have given to our public defender. His therapist is on our side 100% and even she agrees that he is NOT pedophile or predator material. She even has written a letter for the prosecutor saying that he is not what they're trying to make him out to be.
- I was arrested and charged with 4 crimes i didnt commit
- I had an entrapment motion that trial judge wrongfully denied
- State then dropped 3 charges and left me with unlawful use of 2-way communication device in the commission of a felony (an unrelated charge)
- I took plea since i would not get prison time but reserved my right to appeal the denial of entrapment (no SO probation)
- I was sentenced to 3 yrs probation with the 1st yr community control.
- At sentencing, trial judge denied my motion to set appellate bond
- I filed notice of appeal, and also appealed the appellate bond denial as well
- Appellate bond issues proceed faster than appeals and the DCA ruled trial judge should grant bond since I qualified.
- 6 months after i was on community control, trial judge reversed his denial of appellate bond so i was free of my sentence of community control until appeal was final (even if i were imprisoned, i would have been out)
- some 10 months after that, the DCA rules entrapment in my favor and in November issues the mandate on my case after the DCA denied the states motions for rehearing and rehearing en banc.
- on Dec. 4, 2013, the trial judge, on order from the DCA, vacated my sentence and conviction. I am a free man
- CASE CLOSED.
It is all about how you tackle your case and there are times that attorney's do not take the right approach for whatever reason. The harder you fight it, the better the odds and there's a case of Pimentel that Aladdin4d just made me aware of where you can tell the attorney fought like mad all the way til the end and eventually won at trial!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13GH9fTymlqyhA3ZOwlGf7Dx7nNTjGH6NoovcTikUAi4/edit?usp=sharing
I have found that this is one of the biggest obstacles to finding employment and protecting an otherwise unblemished reputation. From the news articles of the arrest to these damned mugshot websites it's so easy for anyone to learn about the arrest. Reputation.com has quoted $3000 for them to do this, but I'm sure most of us are short on that kind of cash as our lawyers have gotten what we can give to work to defend us.
Anyone have any experience with a method that works that doesn't cost thousands of $?
Hi Trey,
Hope everything is well. First I like to thank you in everything you have help me, you have know idea to what extent .
I consider myself very positive about every aspect of life. But our family has been through a lot, in 2010 my husband and I ere involved in a carbon monoxide accident in what use to be our house of ten years. We later lost the house because of all the fines from the city and hospital bills. In 2011 Jonathan gets trouble with this sting and to top it all in 2012 my elder son has an accident in (a city) when he driving and looks at gps and stops short in the red light another car hits him and crashes and kills a little girl. My older son is in jail for DUI manslaughter (he had smoke pot the evening before technically very low as per his drug test) he has a lawyer that is jerk which does not give us any information and has prolong the case forever.
You gave me hope when I had no hope not only for (sons) case but inspired me to obtain a new lawyer for older son .
So even if we do not advance yet with (sons) case I want thank you from the bottom of my heart for given me the encouragement I needed to move on.
enforcement agents, who later suggest illegal activity to those who respond to the ad." It is this kind of common practice that needs to be made uncommon and it is this common practice that we need to stop.
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BzLomEB8bi2PU2hxa2IwaExmT2M&usp=sharing
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/i-am-looking-for-any-kind-of-post-conviction-relie-1515723.html
http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2013/12-17-2013/12-5952.pdf
As far as effectuating change, right now we seem to be at a brick wall. We dont have the support....we need larger players since we are just pawns in this game of chess. A good indicator of this the blog. It's the same people posting over and over. If we wait on the courts for change, it is going to be a long drawn out process. WE DON"T HAVE THE SUPPORT, and I have no clue what anyone is even doing. We are disorganized and few!
We went through that in August with hankinson he denied everything and favored the state. We were not slowed our expert witness psychiatrist or the Vidio of Tyler's arrest. They are crooked there we filed for indigency for Tyler so we could get transcripts for free waiting on them now. Hankinson made mistakes! He and Kathy Ray are heartless keep fighting!
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/in-regards-to-the-numerous-florida-sting-operation-1529293.html
Get it together Due-pro....i am beyond frustrated!
https://independent.academia.edu/TalknStang
http://www.justice.gov/criminal/about/contact.html
Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov
Take 5 minutes out of your time and write a simple message about these illegal sting operations. When done, please let me know or post on the blog that you have filed the complaint so we can kinda keep track of them. So yes, someone did get a call from the Dept. of Justice but no, we cannot get into that. Just please file this complaint. Trust us on this one. Thanks everyone.
http://www.claytodayonline.com/ee/claytoday/en/component/fullstory/304_/sex-sting-results-in-16-arrests-in-clay
Take a good look at these two links. WTF? They didn't have enough money to purchase surveillance gear in Red Cheeks so they cried to the public and suckered them into donating it. WTF? Also, when you look at the stings DATA sheet on Red Cheeks. There were at least 6 cases tossed.....6. That stinks to high heavens to me. Wouldnt you think that if there is collaboration between agencies, instead of suckering the public any more than they already do, maybe they could share equipment? I am sure there is enough gear around at any given time where they could loan it to another ICAC etc, but to scam the public into donating their money for an illegal operation is pathetic.
Now I am going to stir up some interest with my media contacts and clue them in on a few things
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to file a complaint on my behalf to the Dept. of Justice in regards to illegal/unlawful arrests being made while multiple law enforcement agencies conduct illegal sting operations here in Florida. I am living proof that what they are doing is wrong since I was found to be entrapped by a district court of appeals that reversed an illegal conviction. My life was destroyed and my name was dragged through the gutter because LEO's cannot simply follow the rules. Violating ICAC procedure is grounds for revoking funding and this is what needs to happen followed by a complete shutdown of these operations pending an investigation. If you are not aware, this has happened with an ICAC task force in NW Georgia after violations of procedure were made public. That investigation is still pending. It is only fair for the DOJ to do the right thing and stop this unnecessary problem. Ultimately, the DOJ is responsible since they are funding these operations, although they might not be aware of these violations perhaps due to falsifying reports required by ICAC agencies to be submitted on a quarterly basis. Please stop this madness. As a war veteran, I served my country well but in return, my country did not do the same. I did not deserve what happened to me, nor did other innocent men who havn't been as fortunate as I have to win their case. (and I use the term "fortunate" very loosely|) I am asking for help. Below is a link to an article that i wrote that explains in detail where, how and why this problem exists. Thank you
https://www.academia.edu/5471842/Florida_Sting_Operations
http://www.wfla.com/story/24265130/tampa-police-officer-fired-accused-of-having-sex-with-teen