Attempted sex anyone?

One thing I’ve been struggling with, in my mind, is the part where law enforcement found the ‘attempted’ loophole.

A current ‘attempted’ crime is one in which a person takes a ‘substantial step’ toward committing. You can’t just say ‘I want to kill Joe….’ you have to then do something about it – to make it ‘attempted’.

But here’s the thing that gets me, and why these proactive stings, as a business plan, are such a lucrative venture!!

Who doesn’t want to have sex??

Lets say you are a police officer…you work hard to do your job, and it’s a HARD job. You take a lot of shit and disrespect on a daily basis from John Q Public. You work your cases in the children’s sexual assault unit and are able to convict a few bad guys. But the system is so rigged against you – shaky witnesses, prosecutors who only want to take sure wins for political gain, victims who refuse to press charges.

You think to yourself, persons seeking minors take a LOT of time to find…they don’t use their own names, ages, locations, or pictures. Nefarious persons are guarded, easy to spook, cautious about all they say and do. Those persons know what is legal and what is not. Getting them to openly cross a line is difficult at best. Can you catch such a person? Yes, of course you can, but maybe not with the caliber of officers at WSP. Or maybe not with the caliber of officers who find no ethical dilemma in entrapping another human being.

So you push the envelope and start crossing the line, just a little, to see how what you can actually get away with….

Let’s do some comparisons – Say you are online playing a video game where the player who robs the most banks wins. You are doing well and bragging in the game chat how good you are at robbing banks, and how you like to shoot as many guards as you can. In this game shooting guards give bonuses but, you don’t have to say that in the chat because everyone else in the chat is playing the same game – they already know why.

You have an open carry license which is legal in your state. As a red blooded american, you are always packing.

Like clockwork, the next payday you drive to the bank to deposit your check. Upon entering the bank you are tackled and arrested….

Now this is not a proactive sting being run by any officers at this time but…the facts remain the same. You were online talking about robbing banks and shooting guards. The fact that you would never shoot another person unless you were in mortal danger is not a fact the prosecutor brings up. They bring up how you brag about ENJOYING killing those guards! “And then the defendant took the substantial step of driving, with a loaded weapon, to a bank where he planned to rob and kill’

Having friends who say you would never do this means nothing. In the state of WA, and many others, driving to a potential crime scene IS a predisposition. You don’t NEED the money from robbing a bank, but of course you like money – same as our men don’t need or want sex from a minor but sex in general is great, right?

Everything in their proactive sting is done in a way to make you say and do the only things necessary to prove you had even some intent or predisposition. That’s really all they need to twist the facts, isn’t it?

‘Attempted’.

Attempted to me is similar to ‘bi-monthly’. There are two valid, but different definitions. Bi-monthly can mean twice a month, or it can mean every two months. Big difference if referring to how often you will be paid!!

Attempted, also, has two distinct uses in our legal system. Attempted was created in order to punish those who commit a crime that fails. If unable to charge attempted, then things like rape or murder 50 years ago would have to be charged as ‘sexual assault’ and ‘assault with a deadly weapon’ unless the crime was completed. Without ‘attempted’ the perpetrator could not be held responsible for their intent.

But now, the word ‘attempted’ is being used to imply what you might, or might not have done, or even intended. This is not ‘I had a gun, aimed at you, and fired but the gun misfired, thus attempted’. This is ‘I had a gun. I did not show or use the gun but, you were in the room with me when I had a gun. I *could* have tried to kill you’. Remember two months ago when you hit me with that snowball and I shouted at you that I was going to kill you?!? Evidence. Guilty. Prison.

A 2010 article in the WA Spokesman-Review reported that a three-way opinion was given from the WA Supreme Court upholding the conviction of a man in a proactive sting where a fictitious persona was used. There were two dissenting opinions. Justice Richard Saunders wrote then what has become the crux of the problem now…

Sanders said the majority opinion was written in such a way that would make that scenario a criminal offense even though the man realized the situation before any sexual relations could take place.

“Thus, the lead opinion misinterprets (the law) to put those who seek amorous relationships online in peril of attempted child rape charges even where they are neither seeking nor would carry out any sexual contact with a minor,” he said.

Justices Susan Owens and Mary Fairhurst agreed with Sanders’ opinion.

This is the moment, in WA courts, where the word ‘attempted’ changed meaning