Thomas Townsend has an embarrassing criminal past. In 1985, he was convicted of pedophilia, having had sexual relations with a 15-year-old child (at the time, Townsend was 29 years old.) By all accounts, Townsend has led a relatively uneventful life over the years since 1985, spending most of his time building and selling musical instruments to earn a living, and reclusively “keeping to himself” on his property on the edge of town. Local police investigators are curious whether Townsend has truly learned from “the error of his ways.” The local sheriff has received a number of complaints from area citizens, who are appalled that a child sex offender is “among their midst.” Working in collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI,) local police authorities devise and implement a plan to determine whether Thomas is leading an innocent life. Over the course of an eighteen-month period, police investigators mail Townsend a circular they have created, advertising a fictitious publication called “Lustful Lads and Lasses.” Among other pronouncements, the circular entices readers to “order now before publication ceases; see young boys and girls aged 12-16 engaged in all sorts of acts only big boys and girls should be allowed to do!” Having received the circular each month and having declined on seventeen occasions, Townsend finally responds to the circular on the eighteenth occasion, mailing in the $39.95 purchase price. Local, state and federal authorities immediately intervene, arresting Townsend for solicitation of child pornographic materials. At Townsend’s arraignment hearing, his attorney moves for immediate dismissal of the charges, arguing entrapment. Do the police efforts described constitute entrapment? Does entrapment justify dismissal of all charges against the accused? Rather than dismissal of charges, why not simply sanction those authorities responsible for the entrapment? Solution Entrapment is a situation in which law enforcement agents lures a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit. Townsend had declined the circular seventeen times. But on the 18th occasion, he gave in and responded to the circular. So yes, the police efforts described constitute entrapment. Looking at the \"objective\" test - Townsend was not ready and willing to commit crime. This test ignores the accused personality and predisposition to commit the crime. Thus using the objective test, all charges will be dismissed. Authorities responsible for entrapment will not be penalized. There is no such precedence in law..

1. Thomas Townsend has an embarrassing criminal past. In 1985, he was convicted of pedophilia,
having had sexual relations with a 15-year-old child (at the time, Townsend was 29 years old.)
By all accounts, Townsend has led a relatively uneventful life over the years since 1985,
spending most of his time building and selling musical instruments to earn a living, and
reclusively “keeping to himself” on his property on the edge of town.
Local police investigators are curious whether Townsend has truly learned from “the error of his
ways.” The local sheriff has received a number of complaints from area citizens, who are
appalled that a child sex offender is “among their midst.” Working in collaboration with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI,) local police authorities devise and implement a plan to
determine whether Thomas is leading an innocent life. Over the course of an eighteen-month
period, police investigators mail Townsend a circular they have created, advertising a fictitious
publication called “Lustful Lads and Lasses.” Among other pronouncements, the circular entices
readers to “order now before publication ceases; see young boys and girls aged 12-16 engaged in
all sorts of acts only big boys and girls should be allowed to do!”
Having received the circular each month and having declined on seventeen occasions, Townsend
finally responds to the circular on the eighteenth occasion, mailing in the $39.95 purchase price.
Local, state and federal authorities immediately intervene, arresting Townsend for solicitation of
child pornographic materials.
At Townsend’s arraignment hearing, his attorney moves for immediate dismissal of the charges,
arguing entrapment. Do the police efforts described constitute entrapment? Does entrapment
justify dismissal of all charges against the accused? Rather than dismissal of charges, why not
simply sanction those authorities responsible for the entrapment?
Solution
Entrapment is a situation in which law enforcement agents lures a person to commit a criminal
offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit.
Townsend had declined the circular seventeen times. But on the 18th occasion, he gave in and
responded to the circular. So yes, the police efforts described constitute entrapment.
Looking at the "objective" test - Townsend was not ready and willing to commit crime. This
test ignores the accused personality and predisposition to commit the crime. Thus using the
objective test, all charges will be dismissed. Authorities responsible for entrapment will not be

2. penalized. There is no such precedence in law.