tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4937285970642106606.post2199114816711557099..comments2024-03-27T20:47:32.937-04:00Comments on Morton's Musings: Entrapment to be found only in the clearest of casesJames C Mortonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15997892627068235554noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4937285970642106606.post-33807797762342738462012-11-06T07:42:27.929-05:002012-11-06T07:42:27.929-05:00SD,
I agree -- but that ain't the law...SD,<br /><br />I agree -- but that ain't the law...James C Mortonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15997892627068235554noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4937285970642106606.post-42066031785588586442012-11-05T20:17:33.070-05:002012-11-05T20:17:33.070-05:00I have no idea what precedent says on this, but it...I have no idea what precedent says on this, but it seems to me that intent would be important.<br /><br />Specifically, there is a difference between allowing and even enabling a person who intends to commit a criminal act, and enticing and encouraging a person who had no such intention. <br /><br />For me, this would put the burden on the Crown to show that it is not 'the clearest of cases' - that is, it suggests that the burden should be on the Crown to demonstrate that the intent to act criminally existed, and was the primary (if not sole) motivator.Stephen Downeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06140591903467372209noreply@blogger.com