The Problem with Entrapment |
| |
Authors: | Squires Dan |
| |
Institution: | * Fellow, Carr Centre for Human Rights, Harvard University; Barrister, Matrix Chambers. Email: dansquires{at}matrixlaw.co.uk. |
| |
Abstract: | In R v Looseley; Attorney Generals Reference (No. 3 of2000) the House of Lords articulated a legal framework to governentrapment in criminal cases. Their Lordshipsregarded the need for judicial intervention to assist entrappeddefendants as uncontroversial. This article argues that thedoctrine they set out, in fact, necessitates substantial, andlargely unarticulated, departures from principles the courtsordinarily stress as fundamental to the criminal law. In particular,entrapment doctrine determines liability for criminal acts byreference to the kind of environment inhabited by their perpetrators,a perspective the law ordinarily attempts to exclude. This articlesuggests that the anomalous treatment of entrapment can be understoodas a device to prevent the police from relocating the temptationto commit crime to environments in which they are not ordinarilyconfronted and to ensure that those from backgrounds in whichserious criminality is not usually a plausible option will escapepunishment if tempted to commit crime by the police. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 Oxford 等数据库收录! |
|