[lbo-talk] Federal prosecutor caught in child sex sting

[John Thornton]

Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> John Thornton:
>
> My fear here is that they are enticing people to commit crimes that they 
> may have wanted to commit but would not otherwise have acted upon.
>
> [WS:] This makes a certain assumption about human motivation, namely that
> people first conceive deeds in their heads and then go out and execute them.
> That may work in certain cases, but it does not in a great number of others.
> In those other cases, motivation is situational - people react to emerging
> opportunities and engage in activities that they did not plan.  Probably
> most crimes are committed that way (cf. Jack Katz, _Seductions of Crime_) -
> perpetrators do not have the intention of committing a criminal act, but
> engage in activities that eventually lead to a crime.  This
> situationist/interactionist approach to human motivation has a far greater
> explanatory power than the rationalist/mentalist approach (i.e. act being
> first conceived in the mind and then executed.) 
>
> >From that point of view, it does not really matter that much that the
> opportunity has been intentionally created by someone else - as most, if not
> all opportunities are that way.  Would it make any difference if instead of
> law enforcement the "sting" were arranged by another criminal with the
> intent to blackmail the perpetrator, and then turned him in for a refusal to
> pay?  
>
> I tend to believe that such sting operations are rather futile form the
> point of view of crime prevention, because it is the opportunity/situation
> that leads to crime and these "stings" do little to eliminate these
> opportunities.  I do not think, however, that it matters that much in the
> culpability of the perp, because most crimes are results of one opportunity
> or another, rather than conceived a priori by evil criminal mind.  
>
> Wojtek

For many crimes a situationist explanation works best but I disagree 
that it applies in pedophile crimes, which IIRC the evidence supports a 
rationalist approach. The desire exists in the mind and is then 
executed. In some sting operation the desire has apparently not been 
acted upon at the last minute in spite of the opportunity seeming to be 
present when the perpetrator arrives to commit the crime but then leaves 
the scene and does not attempt to engage in the criminal act in spite of 
the apparent opportunity.
I'd be happy to be shown this is incorrect if someone has evidence to 
that end. I should imagine these crimes are conceived because of desires 
not associated with a desire to commit evil in the overwhelming number 
of cases.

John Thornton