Ladies and Gentlemen
of the Jury, my client, Mr. Peterman, is a man who has never been involved in a
crime, but recently, he was a victim of a crude entrapment conducted by the XX
Police Department; and charged with the use of child pornography.
I am here today to
speak for my client Mr. Peterman and in hopes that you understand the great
injustice done. Mr. Peterman, like some Americans, uses the World Wide Web
(WWW) for specific uses, such as Pornographic sites. But, he was recently lured into committing illegal acts,
when, Ms. Female Acquaintance, invited my client to visit her home, stating she
would give my client Mr. Peterman access to the girl if he would come to her
residence. Yes, honorable Jury, my
client, Mr. Peterman did go and arrived with several photographs and a variety
of sex toys.
Nevertheless, XX
Police lures my client and arrested him for a crime that was never committed.
My client carried with him pictures of what it was classified by the XX Police
as Child Pornography, but in fact he was bringing it to Ms. Female Acquaintance
to try to figure out on how to stop the spam emails he gradually receives from
different websites.
Honorable Jury as you
may had be aware prior to sitting here and taking the job as jury, you must had
been informed of Actus Reus and Mens Rea.
In order to find a person guilty of a crime, under US Criminal law, in
most cases, both Actus Rea (action) and Mens Rea (intent) has to be present in
order to consider this a crime.
Ladies and Gentlemen
of the Jury, let me assure you, that Actus reus, was missing. The
physical action of a crime was not present, because it was never committed,
because my client was framed. The US Government is continuously attacking
people, such as Mr. Peterman and by ruining their reputation by posing charges
such as child pornography. The government failed to look at a bigger
picture, by going after those who, produce child pornography, instead of those
who posses child pornography.
As a prosecutor in this in case I would like to question your defense statements. As Mr. Peterson did arrive at the female acquaintance’s home when she told him that she would give him access to a ten-year-old girl, why did he take up on that offer? You said that the reason he had the Pornographic pictures when he arrived was because he wanted to figure out the spam emails that he continues to receive but what was the need of the sex toys? Printouts such as pornographic pictures can be justified in many ways and the reasons for them such as the one you said. But how can you justify sex toys, those are objects which shows the intentions that he came with. If he didn’t have any purpose on child rape than why did he take up on that proposal made by the female acquaintance? I understand that there was no physical action that took place but with the objects that he came with, that could have happened. The ten year old girl never existed, but for Mr. Peterson she did and his intentions were going to change into actions if this all wasn’t a setup. If he didn’t have any bad intentions he could have turn the offer down or not arrive with such disgusting pictures and items, but the fact that he did shows what he came there for.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, Diana, it would be hard to deny the charge of possessing child pornography (which is a crime), but the charge of attempted rape is a different issue, and you rightly point out that there is no actus reus element. Diana, you also point out that it was a set up, but Kanchan makes a good point that this does not change evidence of his intentions.
ReplyDelete