snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Police Blotter

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12 January 2013, 08:03 AM
Graham2001's Avatar
Graham2001 Graham2001 is offline
 
Join Date: 21 January 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 602
Icon24 Lantana man allegedly sold over 40 gallons of moonshine to state agents

Quote:
Got moonshine?

Daniel David Pawa did, according to state alcohol agents. Over 40 gallons of the stuff.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/pal...366,full.story
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12 January 2013, 08:08 AM
rockland6674's Avatar
rockland6674 rockland6674 is offline
 
Join Date: 28 December 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,931
Icon24

What a waste of perfectly good drinkable hooch.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12 January 2013, 04:29 PM
Singing in the Drizzle Singing in the Drizzle is offline
 
Join Date: 24 November 2005
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 4,196
Default

Over 40 gallons as they investigated the operation over several weeks.

What is was surprising is this was only the second arrest for moonshine in the last 12 months. So was this second person also stupid enough to advertise their illegal activities on Craigslist.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12 January 2013, 06:49 PM
fitz1980 fitz1980 is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Singing in the Drizzle View Post
So was this second person also stupid enough to advertise their illegal activities on Craigslist.
The way I read it the moonshiner responded to an ad that the agents put on Craigslist in which they posed as guys looking to buy moonshine.

Quote:
The agents met with the accused hooch supplier after posting an ad to Craigslist on Nov. 13 that was simply headlined, 'Moonshine?'

In the ad, an undercover agent called on whoever had the "strong stuff" to shoot him a text.
To my reading that also sounds like entrapment.

But since they placed a blind ad and than he reached out to them through text message that could change things in a legal sense. I'm really not sure how that works in the court's eyes.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12 January 2013, 07:11 PM
diddy's Avatar
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,581
Default

If they (the moonshiners) committed the act without enticement from law enforcement - in other words, on their own free will, I doubt it is entrapment. For one, the moonshiners likely didn't know the buyers are cops until arrest, and I bet that these guys were making the stuff on their own without the cops asking them - since the cops had been watching them.

It doesn't sound much different than a vice squad or a narc squad watching certain drug dealers and then setting up a buy to arrest them with a bigger crime. The cops were just asking for stuff It's like trying to get a dealer to admit if he has cocaine. The only thing that is different here is that they did it through craigslist. The moonshiners were just dumb enough to reply to the ad. It reminds me of the cops running fake raffles so that criminals can walk into the police station and get arrested.

Remember, undercover operations are not entrapment when the criminal party is already breaking the law in the first place. THe ad is worded in such a way in that they are not asking people to produce it. Just that they have it already meaning they already produced it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13 January 2013, 01:17 AM
Wintermute's Avatar
Wintermute Wintermute is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Hinterlands
Posts: 6,531
Default

It's not even close to entrapment. There is nothing at all that even smells slightly of entrapment.

A normal law abiding citizen would not look at the ad and say, "Gosh I need to violate the law for this!".

Setting up a sting is legal. The vice squads do it all the time.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13 January 2013, 10:24 AM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 22,468
Default

I'm not sure that would even be entrapment in the UK, and we have stricter laws against it than you do. (I may be wrong - despite going on about this all the time, I don't really know anything about it...)

My understanding of the difference can be summed up by impulsive crimes. In the USA, if the police left a handbag sitting on a car seat with the window open, and somebody nicked it, then that would be a fine way to catch handbag thieves. In the UK it would be entrapment, because it's an opportunistic spur-of-the-moment crime and the crime itself wouldn't have been committed without the police operation.

Advertising for moonshine doesn't seem to breach either of those guidelines / laws. Presumably the guy who answered the ad was already illegally distilling moonshine, and just looking for customers. It's possible that in the UK, he could argue that he had never made moonshine before, and thought he'd run up a quick batch in response to the ad, but that would be easy enough to check on, and I assume it would count as a defence rather than as a reason not to charge in the first place.

As I said, though, I'm basically just making this up...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 13 January 2013, 05:29 PM
diddy's Avatar
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,581
Default

I don't think it matters so long as the actions were being done without duress of the police itself. SEtting out "bait cars" to catch thieves by leaving out attractive cars (with cameras and GPS devices hidden" are legal since the cops are not in the area. Heck Hooker stings are legal even if the hooker asks their client is a cop and they lie.

A cop asking people if they have moonshine seems totally legit since in order to make it you have to break the law to do that in the first place. They aren't saying who is buying said moonshine nor are they ordering people to make it (the ad had a question mark in the ad after all). I think the cops are in the clear since you cannot make or possess Moonshine in the first place and they were making a very passive request.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nibs: a candy with an allegedly racist beginning ParaDiddle Business 11 07 October 2012 01:40 PM
They Sold Trigger DrRocket Glurge Gallery 33 22 June 2012 04:00 PM
Smoking TSA Agents Jenn Fauxtography 9 02 July 2011 02:08 AM
Red state, blue state snopes Inboxer Rebellion 10 03 November 2008 12:49 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.