PEOPLE OUR VOICES ARE BEING HEARD- WHAT IS ENTRAPMENT?

Published December 15, 2009 | By

Buju: Setup Or Stupidity?

By Hamilton Nolan on December 16, 2009 at 1:32 AM

Reggae star Buju Banton is in a very tenuous PR situation right now, with a Grammy nomination under fire from gay rights groups, but that did not stop Buju from trying to buy five goddamn kilos of cocaine. Allegedly!

He and two other guys were arrested last week, and now the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has released its version of the story, in which a snitch told them earlier this month that Buju et al “wanted to purchase kilogram amounts of cocaine in the Sarasota area of the Middle District of Florida”. Yeah, while you’re in Sarasota, pick up some coke, OK? So the DEA stone-cold set them up, undercover style. Allegedly:

“Thomas subsequently utilised a knife to cut open the noted [kilogram] of cocaine and began to inspect, along with Myrie, the cocaine. Thomas subsequently handed the knife to [Buju] who instantly wiped the blade of the knife with his finger and placed that finger in his mouth in what appeared to be an attempt to taste the cocaine,” the document stated.

Well that is one of the god damn stupidest career diversifications I’ve ever heard of. Allegedly! Because lots of fans are crying conspiracy – maybe from the gay mafia, dying to get back at him for years of homophobia (um, doubtful), maybe from the Feds, or some… shady government people (you never know! Remember what happened to Bob Marley).

He could very well get locked up for more than 20 years. Buju. Oh Buju. Bad timing.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00645.htm

MI FREN GI MI DI LINK N LOOK

Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that “Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person’s mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant’s lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.

Inducement is the threshold issue in the entrapment defense. Mere solicitation to commit a crime is not inducement. Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 451 (1932). Nor does the government’s use of artifice, stratagem, pretense, or deceit establish inducement. Id. at 441. Rather, inducement requires a showing of at least persuasion or mild coercion, United States v. Nations, 764 F.2d 1073, 1080 (5th Cir. 1985); pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship, ibid.; or extraordinary promises of the sort “that would blind the ordinary person to his legal duties,” United States v. Evans, 924 F.2d 714, 717 (7th Cir. 1991). See also United States v. Kelly, 748 F.2d 691, 698 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (inducement shown only if government’s behavior was such that “a law-abiding citizen’s will to obey the law could have been overborne”; United States v. Johnson, 872 F.2d 612, 620 (5th Cir. 1989) (inducement shown if government created “a substantial risk that an offense would be committed by a person other than one ready to commit it”.

Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant “was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime.” Mathews, 485 U.S. at 63. Thus, predisposition should not be confused with intent or mens rea: a person may have the requisite intent to commit the crime, yet be entrapped. Also, predisposition may exist even in the absence of prior criminal involvement: “the ready commission of the criminal act,” such as where a defendant promptly accepts an undercover agent’s offer of an opportunity to buy or sell drugs, may itself establish predisposition. Jacobson, 503 U.S. at 550.

[cited in USAM 9-18.000]