Chicago police confronted for planting bait car full of Nikes in the Ghetto

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
They do the same thing with bait cars that have a built-in remote shut down. Steal the car and you get caught. Leaving it around unlocked with keys in it is not an invitation to steal unless one is so inclined in the first place.

That implies they are "fishing" for something. That means they are instigating the action. Thus entrapment. And quite frankly many would attempt something if they thought they had an opportunity for easy money. Just look at civil courts.

a reply to: gamer2343


I recall them doing something similar in Midtown Manhattan with an iPhone or iPad and arresting anyone who walked away with it.

Call it whatever you want, but I'm glad to see thieves taken down by their own actions coupled with some smart police work. However, we need a better answer than the "solutions" our single mother -> liberal public school -> juvenile system -> adult prison system pipeline produce

Just because someone leaves their property sit around doesn't give you the right to take it. The sense of entitlement & being owed something merely for breathing/existing is despicable. Which is why these kids need their fathers to teach them properly.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

When they do it in nice neighborhoods they get no results and just waste the money on staking out upstanding citizens. When the do it in low-income high crime level neighborhoods they get real results that make sense of the money spent.

originally posted by: Themaskedbeast
When they do it in nice neighborhoods they get no results and just waste the money on staking out upstanding citizens.

Not true. See my above comment.

The not too good thieves get caught. The good ones wait for someone to steal from the car and then steal from that person after he goes down the street. Add some separation.

a reply to: JimNasium

As you were a cop, think about the situation a bit. How do you know that there is not some serious gang activity in the area? Perhaps the police knew that gang members hang out in the area? Perhaps nabbing them in the act of committing this crime would lead to evidence of other crimes based on their other possessions at the time?

And again to others in this thread that keep calling this entrapment, in spite of the legal definitions on page 1 of this thread - NO this is NOT entrapment. Read the legal definition.

If you left your watch at the gym by mistake and someone took it and kept it instead of handing it in at the reception, what would you call that? I'd say whoever took it stole your watch.
Now, it becomes a bit of a grey area if you left your watch on purpose to see if anyone was a thief.
Personally, I think there are many people who do give into temptation and commit what they see as non-violent crimes, people who would ordinarily never steal anything.
On balance, I think this is pretty low by the poilce as I reckon they'll sweep up people who really are not a danger to anyone or anyone's property.

a reply to: intrepid

Offering an opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. An honest person would not commit a crime based on opportunity.

Entrapment only occurs if police force, threaten, or otherwise coerce someone to do something that they would not otherwise have done.

originally posted by: Themaskedbeast
When the do it in low-income high crime level neighborhoods they get real results that make sense of the money spent.

So it's an action against poverty? That's disgusting. Putting a meal in front of hungry people.

So, instead of investigating actual crimes that have taken place...

They decide to manufacture crime?

Oh, OK. Does anyone else see an issue here??

a reply to: BlueAjah

Are you actually reading what you're writing??

Give them an opportunity to commit a crime? How is that not entrapment?

...and, as I asked above, why not investigate, maybe even solve, actual crimes that have taken place, or is that too hard for 'em?

a reply to: UKTruth

I am confused by your logic?

How does the definition of theft change, based on if the item was left unattended by accident or intentionally?

Either way, if someone takes something that does not belong to them, it is theft.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: intrepid

Offering an opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. An honest person would not commit a crime based on opportunity.

A halfways decent lawyer would have this thrown out. Too bad these people only have access to public defenders.

And when is it OK to put traps, and that's what this is, to "net" "dishonorable" people?

a reply to: seagull

This is nothing new.

A typical entrapment scenario arises when law enforcement officers use coercion and other overbearing tactics to induce someone to commit a crime.

Government agents do not entrap defendants simply by offering them an opportunity to commit a crime. Judges expect people to resist any ordinary temptation to violate the law.

www.nolo.com...

a reply to: intrepid

You must be very young.

Police have been arresting people based on crimes of opportunity for many years, all over the country. This has been upheld in court.

Honest people do not commit crimes of opportunity. If you are saying that somehow people would suddenly commit a crime just because something is in front of them, then you do not understand what morality and ethics are.

a reply to: BlueAjah

I don't care that it's nothing new.

It's still entrapment. Money could be spent else where solving actual crime, rather than manufacturing it.

A good lawyer would get this tossed out of court, but as 'trep said earlier, unfortunately, Public Defenders aren't known for their brilliance in the court room.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: UKTruth

I am confused by your logic?

How does the definition of theft change, based on if the item was left unattended by accident or intentionally?

Either way, if someone takes something that does not belong to them, it is theft.

I wasn't really trying to define it, blue.
I think it's theft in both circumstances, but I also think that there are people who can be tempted to steal.
I guess I have more of an issue with people who plan a theft than I do opportunists. Both wrong, but on different levels.

a reply to: UKTruth

I think that if someone picks up a watch at the gym and keeps it, they never planned to do it. Anyone who can not resist stealing is a criminal, whether they planned it or not.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Themaskedbeast
When the do it in low-income high crime level neighborhoods they get real results that make sense of the money spent.

So it's an action against poverty? That's disgusting. Putting a meal in front of hungry people.

not an action against poverty noone made them take the shoes. But in a gated community people are less likely to take something on someone else's front seat when they could go buy it these people steal to steal for the thrill or is it more for the swag.