Sting Predisposition

Cruz v. State of Florida, 465 So. 2d 516 (1985)

The Casper court found that an otherwise un-predisposed passerby who chose to take the money did not acquiesce, but "succumbed to temptation.... to the lure of the bait."

Petitioner would have this court hold that where the only evidence of predisposition is the commission of the crime the police scenario was designed to elicit, there is an insufficient showing of predisposition, as a matter of law.

The entrapment defense arises from a recognition that sometimes police activity will induce an otherwise innocent individual to commit the criminal act the police activity seeks to produce. The United States Supreme Court has addressed the issue in four principal cases.

Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484, 96 S.Ct. 1646, 48 L.Ed.2d 113 (1976);
United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 93 S.Ct. 1637, 36 L.Ed.2d 366 (1973);
Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369, 78 S.Ct. 819, 2 L.Ed.2d 848 (1958);
Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 53 S.Ct. 210, 77 L.Ed. 413 (1932).

Other than modus operandi, this is the second most ignored aspect of the internet stings conducted in Florida. The police officers are ignoring the fact that the people arrested in internet stings do not have the required predisposition. However, one thing that they do know is that if they can make the end result look bad enough (i.e. Driving to the decoy house with condoms, teddy bears, and beer) then the public is not typically going to care about how the suspects got to the house because they look guilty.
The main thing that is being ignored by the public, due to the lies told by the law enforcement officials, is that the only thing being used against these suspects has to do with physiology. The methods used to conduct these stings are illegal because they have nothing to do with enforcing the statutes on child solicitation. Furthermore, not only are these suspects First Amendment Rights being violated but as well as their right not to be persecuted because of their sex. It is no secret that men are more promiscuous by nature and that it is hard for them to resist sex especially when it is freely given. Secondly, there has been research conducted that proves that men are more sexually attracted to young women. The only thing that the men arrested in internet stings are “guilty” of is having a loose lifestyle. These people are on a road to “destruction” because they are already looking for casual sex on the internet in an adult environment which is very dangerous.

There have been men acquitted on these same grounds even though they initially admitted that they actually believed that the undercover officer was a minor. Since it was apparent that the arranged encounter was consensual the juries for these cases realized that the only reason why these individuals showed up is because of the encouragement and this was the very result that law enforcement was seeking. It was realized that these individuals were not interested in sex with minors but merely succumbed to temptation given by the undercover agents.