Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
Generally these kind of sting operations fall foul of entrapment which is why the cops don't use them, assuming though that the 'sting' was well conducted, essentially the pedo contacted the fake child, was the one that brought up sexual content and actively tried to meet the 'child' then there's no reason not to use this kind of evidence.
|
Entrapment is a bit complicated but generally its only an abuse of process for the state to entrap someone. So if a civilian who is not working with police entraps someone on their own, then strictly speaking the same legal problems do not arise for using the evidence.
That said, in assessing whether to proceed with any case, the police and Crown would still typically assess whether the individual 'caught' was essentially unfairly made to commit an offence they would never have committed but for the vigilantes.
The vigilantes also seem to fail to understand that it is itself a criminal offence to aid or abet (encourage) a person to commit a crime. I suspect in some situations the police have to consider charges for all or charges for none and for various reasons elect to not charge anyone.
There are a number of other evidence problems that can arise as well. Ultimately these cases are circumstantial and proving the person on a video is actually responsible for any of the criminal luring is often not straightforward.
This officer has been arrested and released pending possible charge. It is not clear to me on what I've read so far that any charge will actually ever be laid.
