As this topic seems to have a lot on interest lately, thought I would move it from a different thread to its own. I AM NOT A LAWYER. If you have a specific question related to a specific incident, ask a lawyer. However, this is information I have verified from a number of sources.
There are specific things the police can or cannot do. Not a lawyer so I am not 100% sure of the specifics but, my understanding is an UC cannot ask for money for sex. She/he will try to get you to ask for or offer a sexual act for money. As long as you are the one to suggest the illegal act for a price, you are on the hook.
Example: A woman at a bar asks if you want to party. You ask how much. If she wont give a specific price, walk away. She could be a cop. If she says $100 for a bj and she a cop, its entrapment. Otherwise, its a good time.
Woman tells you she needs $100. You ask what do you get for your money? If she responds with a specific act, your OK, If you say you want a BJ for that $100, your dead meat.
If your talking to someone about having sex and the other party says "How Much?" Walk away. Could be a cop. If they can trick you into quoting a price for a service, its not entrapment.
And yes, cops can lie. Asking if they are a cop first has no legal value. As long as the lie does not induce you to do something you would not otherwise do, they can and do lie all the time.
See below:
ENTRAPMENT
A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.
In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty.
Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.