When law enforcement or government agents use distasteful tactics such as threats, fraud, harassment or even flattery to entice defendants into committing crimes, this is entrapment. There is a key when using entrapment as a defense; law enforcement or government agents cannot entrap the potential defendant by simply offering the criminals the opportunity to commit the crime. The reason for this is that the expectation from the judge is that an average person should be able to resist a simple temptation to violate the law; there has to be excessive persuasion.
There are two means of assessing an entrapment defense, and they are referred to as the Objective and Subjective Standards.
• The Objective Standard – is used when defendants give the entrapment evidence, the jurors decide if the actions of law enforcement would have brought a law-abiding person to commit the crime.
• The Subjective Standard – The difference in the Subjective Standard is that the jurors will decide if the defendant is more or less is drawn to that type of crime because they have been arrested for it in the past. If there was prior criminal activity on the behalf of the defendant, then the defendant will be held responsible for the crime despite the actions and behaviors of law enforcement. The Subjective Standard is more relevant to the criminal.
Fill out our form to contact a skilled criminal defense attorney for consultation and more details of the offense.
When law enforcement or government agents use distasteful tactics to entice to commit crime.