Drug War

Narcotic Honey Traps: Drug Cops Seduce Teenagers

|

An undercover 25-year-old female police officer maintained an ongoing relationship with a teenager in order to pop his pot-selling cherry— and then arrest him for it.

Last week, Alternet shared this story, part of a segment on NPR's This American Life:

Last year in three high schools in Florida, several undercover police officers posed as students. The undercover cops went to classes, became Facebook friends and flirted with the other students. One 18-year-old honor student named Justin fell in love with an attractive 25-year-old undercover cop after spending weeks sharing stories about their lives, texting and flirting with each other.

One day she asked Justin if he smoked pot. Even though he didn't smoke marijuana, the love-struck teen promised to help find some for her. Every couple of days she would text him asking if he had the marijuana. Finally, Justin was able to get it to her. She tried to give him $25 for the marijuana and he said he didn't want the money—he got it for her as a present.

This is reminiscent of a story from September 2011, also featured on This American Life, where narcotics task force commander Norm Wielsch collaborated with private investigator and former SWAT officer Chris Butler to set up a high schooler who had been selling ecstasy in Contra Costa, CA. Butler hired two amateur actresses off of Craigslist to essentially offer group sex in exchange for the feel-good pill. When the kid came to make the deal, he was slammed against a car at gunpoint in an effort to "scare him straight," according to the story. Listen to the whole podcast, or click to minute 25 for the bit about the high school ecstasy dealer known as the Candyman.

Unlike the Candyman, who appears to have been at least already selling drugs, Justin from Florida had a clean record before this incident and repeatedly claimed to have had zero interest in the drug world, or the people who deal in it, before this officer instigated the whole scenario. 

Wielsch and Butler are both currently facing charges for their corrupt antics, including selling large amounts of methamphetamines and pot from Wielsch's narcotics department evidence stash.

Yet these don't appear to be isolated incidents. The Huffington Post article cited two other cases in which police went undercover and hung out with teenagers and minors for extended periods of time:

In Brooklyn, New York, a 19-year-old student was charged with receiving stolen property after buying an iPhone from an undercover police officer in December.

The New York Police Department set up the operation to target people buying and selling stolen electronics, NBC New York reported. The sting led to 141 arrests, with Robert Tester among them.

But Tester said he was tricked into purchasing the phone after the undercover officer told him he needed money to feed his daughter for Christmas.

Police defend the arrest, but Tester is planning on filing a civil counter-suit against NYPD, according to the report.

In January, police arrested ten students at a Texas high school for selling prescription drugs and marijuana.

When interviewed for the NPR story, the female undercover cop said, "These kids need to wake up. They need to realize they can't be doing this." 

But it's worth noting that in every one of the these stories, the undercover cops manipulated teenagers and took advantages of their vulnerabilities. In the end, it's worth wondering whether Robert Tester or Justin learned lessons about selling and buying contraband, or whether they just learned to distrust people a little more.

When the operation concluded at the Florida high school, "the police did a big sweep and arrested 31 students—including Justin," according to the Alternet article. Justin has been convicted of selling pot inside a school, a felony in Florida. He is no longer eligible to join the Armed Forces as he had planned to do upon graduation and is now attending community college.

Read more about the failures of the drug war.

NEXT: A "C" for Bill Gates NYT Column

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Act of Valor

    1. Are you part of the JackBooting EnviroPolice movement?

      1. What if you think Obama isn’t as dedicated as he should be to crippling American business?

    1. Headline on that web page:

      Israel to Demolish Palestinian Solar Energy Program

      So, when did Israel start boosting and giving direct aid to the Palestinian economy?

      1. The oh so evil Jews Israel hurting the ever innocent and beleaguered Palestinians. Who would have guessed you’d find such a thing at the Huff-on-ton Post. Cute cross over with the wonders of green energy there too.

        And as for your question, here’s the answer.

    2. Not that I was ever going to be your core demographic, but as all you can seem to do is post this link on every thread, I will assume your website is as stupid and vacuous as you are to use no reason, facts, logic, or even minimal connection to make an argument for why anyone should care…. you assume if enough people see it they will click.

      You might be correct, more might click. Consider my refusal to do so an attempt to show you this will fail in the long run.

      1. We are the 69%

      2. We are the 69%

      3. We are the 69%

      4. We are the 69%

      5. We are the 69%

      6. We are the 69%

      7. We are the 69%

      8. We are the 69%

      9. We are the 69%

      10. We are the 69%

      11. We are the 69%

      12. INVEST in Canadian Oil!

  2. Wow, If that happened to me I’d probably never date another person again.

    1. You might want to do a background check first.

      1. UA’s are the way to make certain your potential suitor (or suitorette as the case maybe) is not a narc.

        If it’s green she won’t be mean.

  3. Clearly the War on Drugs is for the children. I mean what can be a better experience for an 18 year old kid than a felony conviction and possibly some time in a rape-cage?

    1. Better that than he abuse marijuana, which leads to harder drugs.

      1. And where do these harder drugs lead?

  4. We’re winnin’!

  5. Can’t imagine many socially-awkward honor students who wouldn’t fall for this level of entrapment. How do these cops sleep at night?

    1. Justin fell in love with an attractive 25-year-old undercover cop after spending weeks sharing stories about their lives, texting and flirting with each other.

      God tell me that the poor kid at least got to tap that ass.

      1. And that he did so before turning 18.

    2. Cops drink themselves to sleep.

    3. They sleep the divine sleep of the truly self-righteous, or drift in the monster’s dreamless void.

      1. “drift in the monster’s dreamless void.”
        This. +1

      2. the real monsters don’t float in the void; they dream of the horrible things they’ve done, and enjoy it immensely. This woman is simply a self-righteous prick.

  6. Hmmm, the American Public Transportation Association is displaying Reagan’s corpse in a banner ad at the top of this page.

  7. But it’s worth noting that in every one of the these stories, the undercover cops manipulated teenagers and took advantages of their vulnerabilities.

    This is the key point, obviously. These are just kids, and they’re being preyed upon by adults they trust. This is exactly what the fucking cops are supposed to be protecting them from.

    1. In a libertarian nation, the police would protect citizens from force and fraud.

      In America, police initiate force and fraud.

      What does this say about the land of the “free?”

      1. That it is a fucking joke.

        1. And I KNOW jokes! … being one.

      2. It’s the Land of the Free to do as you’re told.

  8. Today’s news presents such a dramatic contrast in the virtues of the protagonists:

    Bradley Manning is that most rarest of breeds-a public sector actor who is actually a hero.

    The undercover cops are just the type of sub-human scum the identities of whom should be promulgated far and wide in order to permit as many people as possible the opportunity to do some tarring and feathering.

    1. no, Bradley Manning is NOT a hero; he is an affront to anyone who has ever put on a military uniform. No one made his sorry ass join us, no one made him cash the checks and take all the other benefits, and no one made him shoot anyone. He is not much different from the cops – cloaking himself in unearned glory by pretending to have done something substantive.

      1. I’m still thoroughly confused on the Bradley Manning issue. My initial understanding is that Manning was whistle blowing. But his defnense has now literally gone from a whistle blower to, “My head was in a fog because I was gay”.

        I think the idea of Manning as a hero is drying up faster than a puddle on a Texas parking lot.

        Which I find doubly strange because one of the early aguments against having gays with high security clearances is that their mental state was too fragile, and therefore were susceptible to the manipulations of foreign agents and were therefore… a security risk.

        Manning essentially is making that case… as his defense.

        1. I heard the same thing from a former NSA guy (well, shit might as well point him out in a line up — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMUrpSSloDk). He taught one of my classes. I asked him about the comment he made about gays being too susceptible to blackmail to be trusted with a security clearance with the hypothetical, “heterosexuals get blackmailed with honeypot set ups, so what is different about gays?” He wasn’t comfortable going there, but insisted there were sound reasons but they would never pass politically correct muster if made explicit. I’ve been curious about that ever since. However, it should be easy to test. Bill Gates as CIA chief ended bans on homosexuals more than twenty years ago. Has there been a rise in the number of turncoats? Assuming so for the sake of argument, has it caused the CIA to be dysfunctional?

          1. Robert Gates, lol. Not the other guy.

          2. I would imagine that gay people would be much less susceptible to blackmail if allowed to serve openly.

            1. This is correct. The NSA allows openly gay people to serve (now, this has been the case for at least 15 years). Being closeted, however, is a problem just like anything else you can get blackmailed about.

          3. presumably the guy’s point was that every single gay person who isn’t open about it (only a subset of course) is susceptible to blackmail simply by virtue of this fact. In the “honeypot” situation, the agent has to fall for the trap first, which would also apply to everyone.

            1. There is a good point there. If, while doing a background check on a candidate to join the Agency, and that candidate isn’t openly gay, but evidence is found that he had engaged in homosexual activity on the down low, that would be a good reason to consider the candidate high risk.

              1. And this is what they actually do. Being openly gay is not a problem for the background check.

        2. The oath to defend and protect the constitution trumps all.

          The constitution does not permit the government to make war / kill people who have not killed americans.

          The constitution does not permit the government to have secrets or create a “state secrets” doctrine /rationale or to keep information “classified” and unavailable for the public to see.

          The constitution does not permit the government to engage in covert warfare in foreign lands.

          The constitution does not permit the government to create and expand empire.

          The constitution does not permit the government to install and maintain military installations all over the world.

          The constitution does not permit the government to create and fund a military industrial national security national surveillance state.

          If the framers and ratifiers had intended to grant such powers to the federal government they would have so said.

          1. The oath to defend and protect the constitution trumps all.

            Manning doesn’t believe so, because he’s not using that defense.

            1. Does not follow.

              You use the defense you think is most likely to get you off, not the one you feel the strongest about. It’s clear the whistleblower defense is not going to get him off with this regime.

          2. Mike, I’m as pro-Constitution as anyone, but most of that is just simply fantasy.

            1. How so?

              Do you see explicit language empowering the federal gvt. to do the things I enumerated?

              Besides, the ratifiers were assured by the federalists that the feds could only do that which was specifically set forth in the constitution ane that there were no implied powers.

              The whole idea was to keep the leviathan loving lenins in check and that no doomsday / mushroom cloud pretexts could ever justify any increase in gvt. power – ever.

              1. What you say may be true…but it has nothing with why Manning committed his foolish, traitorous, and dishonorable actions. He is disgrace to his service and, by extension, my service. To make matters worse, his actions have potentially endangered the fellow servicemembers and agents that he is duty bound to safeguard and share fellowship with.
                That you would characterize him as a hero for whatever misguided reasons you may have is a slap in the face to the REAL heroes who mostly go unrecognized.

        3. What Manning did was embarrass the fuck out of the Army. Their INFOSEC was a fucking joke; he made them look like tools. He gave the American public a glimpse of what their government was doing in their name, under their flag, and with their tax dollars. That’s some pretty heavy shit.

          He’s probably not a hero; he may be a martyr; he is definitely a whipping boy. I don’t know if I support what he did, but that may be because I myself would not do it. I’d like to think I would, sure, if the shit I was reading was bad enough, but I’m not gonna bullshit myself. He’s been psychologically tortured and vilified by his government. He’s going to face a panel of servicemembers who will probably skullfuck him with the UCMJ. His life is wrecked, and at the end of the day, he not only swore an oath to defend the Constitution, but to obey the orders of the officers appointed over him.

          1. I can’t say if he’s done the former, but he sure as hell didn’t do the latter. *endpost*

            Thanks, spammers, for the 900-character limit.

          2. Information security absolutely relies on TRUSTED personnel taking their briefings seriously and acting appropriately to safeguard information. Yes, there are mechanical, electronic, and other external safeguards, but ultimately they will fail if personnel with access do not act correctly 100 percent of the time.

            1. Slight pedantic fix: individuals with clearance do not need to operate correctly 100% of the time to be safe, they only need to be secure when attempts are made.

              Of course then define attempt and secure and… bit the point is individuals with access can makes tons of mistakes without consequence.

              The breach happens when their mistake coincides with an attack exploiting that mistake.

              So…. they do not technically have to be correct 100% of the time.

      2. Bradley Manning is NOT a hero; he is an affront to anyone who has ever put on a military uniform.

        Oh, fuck you. He’s done more for the cause of liberty than his entire chain of command have ever done.

        -jcr

      3. I put on a uniform. Bradley Manning is a hero because he put himself in jepardy in order to expose government wrong doing. Informed voters are vital to a democracy.

  9. I’ve tried reading this story in every possible way but I can’t understand how this isn’t considered entrapment.

    I would think a jury would clearly agree that the 18 year old -who hadn’t even DONE any drugs prior to the arrest- was simply coerced in to felony by manner of entrapment.

    Still, I hope the woman responsible for getting him arrested gets some sort of comeuppance. She’s simply pitiful.

    1. The jurries are rigged with cop families, bureaucrats, teachers, and other maggots of society.

      1. The jurries are rigged with cop families, bureaucrats, teachers, and other maggots of society.

        My experience is they’re various county employees. So.. yeah.

        1. What “experience” do you have that you would know the occupations of the typical jury?

          Are you a judge or a bailiff?

          1. I have two frineds who are currently doing time in club fed.

            They were convicted of failure to file / evasion.

            The jury? Including the two alternates, of the 14, 11 were in the public sector. Another was an employee of a defense contractor.

            This is the reality, Tulpa.

            1. Btw, the two friends are husband and wife.

              They are christians and libertarins. They find me to be a tad bit too anarcho for their tastes.

            2. Again, how do you know this?

              1. I was there.

                1. You were where? Obviously not on the jury (unless you made friends with people who you voted to convict). So where did you get this information? Did they have a break in the trial where the jury talked about their occupations and hobbies?

                  1. Occupation comes up in the venire fascia of jury selection. All potential jurors are asked their occupation, as it may have relevance in the details of the case and lawyers can sometimes use that to get more beneficial jurors.

                    Also, public employees are virtually the only people in society who get jury duty paid at rates of regular pay from their employers.

                    1. Voir dire isn’t open to the public, is it? I actually don’t remember (certainly no one other than lawyers and parties was watching at any of mine) but I can’t imagine it is.

                    2. I’ve seen criminal voir dire done in public

          2. What “experience” do you have that you would know the occupations of the typical jury?

            Jury duty.

            1. How many juries have you served on to make this assessment?

          3. Glad that you asked; I am a frequent defendant in court for various offenses against public order.

      2. ewwww ur bad. plus, simply not true

      3. On my one jury selection experience, everyone with an IQ over 60 was culled immediately. The people they chose were barely smart enough to breath on their own. The most desired quality of a juror is malleability.

        1. Don’t forget credulity.

        2. See, it all comes back to county employees and other members of SEIU

      4. I’m currently on a jury panel, hoping I can get a case like this and nullify the fuck out of it. I am a chemical engineer in the private sector, hired for my own skills.

        1. So you manufacture meth for a Mexican fast food chicken restaurant tycoon in New Mexico?

        2. Joe R, You are a good man.

        3. If you really want to be on the panel, keep your mouth shut during voir dire. IMHO, your occupation will probably still get you tossed, but if you open your mouth and reveal any intelligence or critical thinking, it’s very likely you’ll be peremptorily struck. At least, this was the experience for my panel, and for the panels my friends who practice criminal defense talk about. If you don’t say anything, then you’re a blank spot, and either side may just not feel like spending the strike on you.

          1. This is spot on. Answer all questions as simply and directly as possible, with zero exposition, just as if you were a defendant on the stand. My wife works as a paralegal, which you’d think would get her excluded. She always gets selected because she keeps her mouth shut and only answers questions with the minimum amount of information possible for an honest answer. I’ve been excluded about a dozen times over the past three decades, probably because I’m a bit too chatty when they ask questions.

          2. I once met an assistant DA at a birthday party my son went to. I mentioned that I have often been called for jury duty, but never chosen, and that I surmised that defense attorneys don’t like engineers.

            The DA said that prosecutors don’t like engineers because they are too logical and analytical, that they are too inclined to perceive reasonable doubts regarding the prosecutor’s conclusions from the evidence presented.

            That discussion completely changed my attitude about the so-called justice system.

            1. You forgot the scare quotes around justice.

    2. I’ve tried reading this story in every possible way but I can’t understand how this isn’t considered entrapment.

      It probably will be. I don’t see it any other way. If the story can be taken even remotely at face-value, the kid engaged in activity he wouldn’t have normally engaged in upon the urging of a police officer.

      Still, I hope the woman responsible for getting him arrested gets some sort of comeuppance. She’s simply pitiful.

      I’m hoping the kid totally hit that, and is posting pictures on his facebook account right now.

      1. Will be? Didn’t you read that he was convicted?

        Using sex to lure kids into drugs to lure them into jail. Could’ve been worse, though. “Now that we have this leverage over you with the drug charge, we’d like you to do us a little favor and infiltrate this terror organiz’n. If you get blown up, we will deny any cx.”

        1. I meant to write should have been. Noted. And already happened on the”just pose as a buyer and wear this wire” tragedy.

      2. If she let him ‘hit that’, it would blow the case.
        I knew an undercover narc once who said if he ever went into dealing he would only meet with women and make them blow him before any bussiness was done to invalidate any testimony she might give later on.
        Any sex kills a drug case.

        1. “Any sex kills a drug case”

          Please explain. Why?

        2. Haha! What a G! Mess with the system, AND get free dome. Thumbs up for your friend.

    3. It is entrappment. Notice, it didn’t say the kid was convicted. I can’t find the story. But the problem is you have to get a judge to do the right thing, good luck with that. Or you have to risk a jury. Most kids probably just plead out to a misdemeanor to avoid the risk.

      This is just evil. What the fuck is wrong with people.

      1. From the link: “Justin has been convicted of selling pot inside a school, a felony in Florida.”

        1. See what drugs can do to you?

        2. Fuck. That nasty fucking whore. If I were that kid’s dad, i would go find her and fucking shoot her.

          1. I just wonder where they found 12 people who would convict in those circumstances. What a rogues gallery that jury must have been.

            Immediately upon hearing the background of the investigation I would have been a not-guilty vote etched in granite, regardless of the judge’s instructions. Clear entrapment.

            1. they never would, which is why the DA will never let it get that far, he will cut a deal. But he will probably fuck the kids life up as much as he possibly can. Given that your average 18 year-old will be scared to deal of even the remotest chance of prison.

            2. Plea bargained.

              1. Then it’s not a conviction…

                1. Sure it’s a conviction. He “voluntarily” pled guilty.

                  1. My understanding of “conviction” means that a jury convicted him.

                    And clearly if you think such a thing would be entrapment you would not be a prosecutor’s first choice.

                    1. It’s treated the same.

                      Jury trials are the exception; most convictions are negotiated.

                      John Langbein discussed this a few decades ago, in a famous (I would like to say influential) article, Torture and Plea Bargaining:

                      http://judicialstudies.unr.edu…..argtxt.pdf

                      The system can’t afford to give every defendant a full trial with all the modern procedural bells and whistles, so it resorts to shortcuts. Faced with a similar situation, medieval courts used torture to extract confessions. Modern courts use plea-bargaining to get defendants to give up their rights for a lower sentence than they might get if convicted (eg, if the jury believes the undercover cop instead of you).

                    2. PS – It’s not the jury’s fault – juries used to process cases expeditiously, so you didn’t need to bribe/threaten defendants to give up their rights. Extra rules make trials more expensive (though Lord knows not always fairer), so we simply can’t afford to have trials in most cases.

                      Not exactly a dirty little secret, since it’s so obvious, but dirty nonetheless.

                    3. Well, as a cosmotarian I’m already aware of all the issues with plea bargains, but you’re probably right about how “convicted” is being used here.

                    4. Just thought I’d pimp Langbein’s article. It was enlightening.

                    5. Please allow me to repeat that…

                    6. Actually, thanks then.

                      I’ve been reading through Pinker’s Better Angels, so it’s actually pretty topical for me.

                    7. I’m just trying to pimp Langbein’s article. It was an eye-opener.

                    8. Yes, a plea bargain has a similar result as a conviction for the lower charge, but it isn’t commonly called a conviction. I mean, you wouldn’t say someone who confessed to a crime was convicted of it, would you?

                    9. And clearly if you think such a thing would be entrapment you would not be a prosecutor’s first choice.

                      That would seem to be the case; every time I’ve been in voir dire as a potential juror, the prosecution booted me. Which is funny considering some here think I’m a statist bootlicker.

                    10. Aren’t you a math professor? Of course they boot you…

        3. but he didn’t complete a sale..he gave the woman a gift since he declined any money. Crime in that part of FL must be non-existent if the cops have money and manpower to waste on shit like this.

          1. I heard the story when it ran originally. He eventually took the money after the she-cop insisted over and over even though he tried many times to just give it to her as a gift. This is even lower than most cop/drug war stories.

            1. Jesus. What a fucking whore. I hope her daddy never loved her.

              1. Where do you think girl cops come from?

              2. If that’s the case, I wish she would have just become an honest stripper like most of the rest of them do.

          2. In Texas, it counts as a sell even if you don’t take the money. No clue if Flordia is the same.

      2. Most local podunk judges refuse to make any rulings on pretrial motions at all other than letting the case proceed.

        1. +1.

          The Law and Order shtick of getting the search tossed on an evidentiary failing is usually bullshit. Not saying it never happens, but you’re really living right the day it does. This is from talking over the years with Houston-area criminal counsel. YMMV elsewhere.

    4. I can’t understand how this isn’t considered entrapment.

      That’s because it is entrapment. The question at hand is whether the court and the jury are going to let these assholes get away with it.

      -jcr

      1. Yep. They have. The kid plead guilty, and with a dirty criminal record will never get a professional license or work for a company that does background checks.

  10. I like the part where they infiltrate schools.

    How can anyone confuse this with a valid police strategy? Yeah, I guess posing as a hitman when a person is known to be looking for one is good police work, or something. How common is that? But you can hear plenty about cops trying to set up drug deals for piddly amounts, just big enough to send another kid behind bars for years. And what are the penalties for blatant entrapment, like above? These officers and everyone who approved it are scum of the earth.

    1. Good police work is hard. It takes work. Much easier to spend your time busting dumb kids boosting your arrest numbers. That is how you get promoted.

    2. And you thought 21 Jump Street was fiction!

  11. Is it true that cops are required to identify themselves when asked directly, even if they are undercover?

    And if not, why not?

    1. No. Police, protected by SCOTUS and federal and state and usually local statutes can lie and even break the law in the commission of investigating a crime.

      Disclaimer: I have simply answered a question, not commented upon my agreement with the answer.

      1. Police, protected by SCOTUS and federal and state and usually local statutes can lie and even break the law in the commission of investigating a crime.

        Some animals are more equal than others.

  12. they just learned to distrust people a little more

    An overdue and undertaught lesson.

    1. Everyone in that school learned to distrust cops a lot more.

      Also a valuable lesson.

  13. When interviewed for the NPR story, the female undercover cop said, “These kids need to wake up. They need to realize they can’t be doing this.”

    Waking up and realizing stuff does not equal having a felony conviction, you stupid repulsive scumbag.

    These people are vile beyond belief. It’s not just that they fucked some kid over. It’s that plus the fact they had to lie and act and gain trust and then eagerly betray that trust, which they did, willingly.

    1. I remember being 18, and although I had smoked pot by then I was still oblivious to just about every drug out there. There was a time during my senior year that if some smoking hot random chick started telling me how she’d do me if I scored some weed I would’ve done it in a heart beat.

      I’m pretty sure this would apply to most socially awkward 18 year olds in high school.

      Tar, feathers.

      1. If it would havergotten laid in high school, I would have bought a fucking rocket launcher.

        1. ackward gramar- if it had gottem me laid in high school…

          1. still fucked it up, you get the idea

        2. I would have bought a fucking rocket launcher without any “if” condition.

        3. I don’t think being fucked by a rocket launcher counts as getting laid.

      2. Even though I would prefer the tar and feathers, the woman cop was fresh out of academy and probably couldn’t conceive of refusing the assignment. And she said in the story that she didn’t lead him on or flirt or promise to go to the prom with him like he said she did. I tend to believe him, and just wish she was a human so she would have quit the job as soon as she was given such a shit assignment.

        1. And she said in the story that she didn’t lead him on or flirt or promise to go to the prom with him like he said she did.

          And as we all know, cops never lie.

          1. Not just that, but what is the difference between actions defined like this: an ‘adult deliberately never alluding to future activities’ and an ‘adult who acts in a way which is easily misconstrued by an 18 year old, but is technically not promising in nature’?

            Just wow…

      3. There was a time during my senior year that if some smoking hot random chick started telling me how she’d do me if I scored some weed I would’ve done it in a heart beat.

        A time? Hell, I’d do it now!

        1. It’s the biological imperative…. we would all do it now, regardless of age of sex…

          There are some limits, extremely moral people usually cannot be talked into murder for love, but given the right scenario, belief in it, and through love in there…. all humans fail that test.

          To punish this child with anything more than a good discussion about heinous bitches is the height of societal hypocrisy.

          Jail a kid for behaving as any of us would….

          1. To punish this child with anything more than a good discussion about heinous bitches

            Heinous bitches are heinous.

            1. First – thank you for ignoring my egregious spelling errors….

              But I have thought – maybe there is a silver lining…. I mean when the legal system is setup to almost completely discount justice, when Waco was ignored…. maybe, just maybe this is what is needed to get people to pay attention to the consistent harm done by our simple disregard of things like innocent until proven guilty.

      4. this would apply to most socially awkward 18 year old boys in high school.

    2. They had to wreck the kid’s life to save it!

      -jcr

  14. Like I said before, this is straight-up sociopathy.

    1. It is. How does she not think “ah he is a nice kid, lets not do this?”. It would be one thing if she befriended the school X dealer. But she went after some honor student. Nasty horrible evil bitch is too weak of a term. I hope she catches the fucking clap on her next assignment. And I guarantee the little slut was putting out. Catch crooks on your back. Now that is a liberated women.

      1. The next step is “minors”, and it will be deemed legally acceptable.

  15. At least it kept him out of the Armed Forces.

    1. Silver Linings ftw.

      1. well, at least, if those weren’t forfeited in the arrests.

  16. Does anyone really expect better from cops?

    1. actually, I do expect better. I’ve known a lot of cops who were good folks and a few who were not so good, not much different really than the business world, except for the part about guns, badges, and arrest power. It may be that “except” part that leads me to expect better and it’s why a part of me secretly roots for the Internal Affairs guys.

    2. This is the $64,000 question. And the answer is “no”. In fact, you never know when one is going to do something so vile that it stuns you, even though we’ve seen ample evidence of what cops do on a regular basis.

      1. Every time I think I have seen the worst, Reason proves me wrong.

      2. No, this is totally beyond the usual nutpunch.

        Usually the stories are of cops

        1. Going too far in punishing people who were actually breaking the law of their own accord

        2. Screwing up and attacking innocent people by mistake

        but this is entirely different. They knew this kid was innocent and carefully manipulated the situation for a long period of time. This wasn’t negligence or overreaction. This is purely malicious.

        1. Yes, this was truly maliciious.

          But, Kelly Thomas’ beating death wasn’t?

          1. That was horrible, and imho the cops responsible should be prosecuted for murder, but at least it could be filed under overreaction to a noncompliant homeless person.

            In this case, the cops absolutely went out of their way to fuck over a person who wasn’t even irritating them.

            1. Yes, but they are firm in their belief that this will teach them not to let anyone talk them into doing something illegal. So they’ve actually done them a service. (remember similar claims from the prosecutors going after teen girls for distributing “kiddie porn” when sexting their boyfriends. – I had to throw her in jail for 20 years so she could avoid the humiliation of having her boobs forever exposed on the internet)

              Worse still, although we seem to agree this case is a slam-dunk evil, most of the folks I’ve shared it with take the “stupid kid should have known better” approach. 6 out of 8 didn’t see anything wrong with the entrapment and had the opinion of “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.” They had no sympathy whatever for the kid, no notion that enticing an otherwise law-abiding kid into a felony was wrong in any way.

    3. Does anyone really expect better from cops?

      No. Once, I believed that power corrupts people, but that’s not true. Power draws the corrupt in the same way honey draws flies. Good men are hesitant to rule because they fear bringing undue harm to others. Corrupt people will step on whoever is foolish in enough to lay down in front of them in their pursuit of more power.

  17. Monsanto found GUILTY in farmer illness
    http://www.naturalnews.com/035…..rance.html

    1. According to that link they were found “this page cannot be found”.

      1. Be nice, John. Their servers are solar powered.

        1. The second link came up. Idiot farmer in France inhales a bunch of weed killer and then sues Monsanto because they didn’t warn him that inhaling weed killer is a bad idea. Court gives idiot money because they feel sorry for him and big corporations print their own money anyway.

          yeah, that is really a big deal alright.

        2. Think of every 404 error you get as a carbon credit. Al Gore is smiling.

      1. Some kid’s life is completely fucked over by the cops in the United States and all corpsefucking douchehammer Fernando can think of is some asshole farmer in a tort case in France.

        Fuck you. Fuck you to hell, you unempathetic psychopath.

        1. Damn, that was hot.

        2. +forever

        3. Hear hear! Fernando please. FUCK. OFF.

        4. Ya know, most of the time I don’t mind a threadjack, but this is a young person’s future and life we’re talking about. It’s also about the utter corruption scuzziness of the modern police officer.

      2. How do you say “fuck stick” in French?

        1. “Le fuck stick,” or possibly “le stick de fuck.” I’m not 100% sure.

          1. I generally prefer to use the classic “Va t’faire enculer chez les grecques,” which roughly translates as “Go get fucked in the ass by Greeks.” French profanity is truly awe-inspiring.

  18. I hope that bitch is afflicted with a conscience one day.

    1. The only known treatment of which causes heavy liver damage.

      1. And cranial lead poisoning.

  19. Sowing distrust in the drug market is actually part of the strategy for “winning” the drug war. Making drug dealing (and buying) more dangerous probably does keep some people from getting involved.

    1. It also provides the secondary benefit of teaching people not to trust the cops.

      1. No, it doesn’t even do that, because the cop was plainclothed.

    2. How does this sow distrust in the drug market when the drug market itself isn’t targeted? This sows distrust in chicks, basically.

  20. “In the end, it’s worth wondering whether Robert Tester or Justin learned lessons about selling and buying contraband, or whether they just learned to distrust” woman completely…isn’t that how all libertarians are created?

    1. Cunts are cunts. Nut said?

    2. I cannot speak for even a small percentage of libertarians, but I distrust almost everyone equally. And where I might trust one over the other, things such as sex or age or race are irrelevant and ignored factors in determining trust.

    3. What is matter rather, do the boys not pay enough attention to you? You poor thing. Maybe if you didn’t shit all over every threat you get on, people might be nicer to you.

      And no, Libertarians don’t mistrust women. They love Kristen and any number of other women who post on here. They just don’t trust you.

      1. Aw, you really care about us! How sweet!

    4. So this is the message you want to send to all youth like myself out here trying to do the right thing and not love these hoes?

  21. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  22. “19-year-old student was charged with receiving stolen property after buying an iPhone from an undercover police officer in December”

    If the cunts had it, how could it be stolen property, unless they stole it?

    Since they used the bullshit about “feeding my kid on Christmas” I doubt they told said it was stolen, which means the justification for the arrest was that he didn’t purchase the phone from an authorized retailer.

    1. It only matters that the student believed it was.

  23. NYT: Why Do Innocent People Confess?

    Several months after Antonio Ramirez was shot seven times in Oakland, Calif., the police picked up a frightened 16-year-old named Felix, isolated him in an interrogation room late at night without a lawyer, rejected his pleas to see his mother, and harangued him until he began to tell them what he thought they wanted to hear.

    They wanted a diagram of the crime scene … but whatever he drew was so inaccurate that the police never produced it. When he described escaping in one direction after the killing, they corrected him … . When he didn’t mention an alley nearby, they told him about it … .

    Yet … he had the perfect alibi: On the day that Antonio Ramirez was gunned down, Felix had been locked up.

    1. Words fail.

      1. There’s a direct correlation between my productivity at work and the absence of any police misconduct stories on Hit & Run. Today’s worse than usual due to the combination of drug war, disrespect for civilian autonomy, and cunts being cunts.

        But then, I’m a patent attorney, so my inefficiency is society’s overall gain.

    2. Innocent people do confess. I would have never believed it until I saw it. And if I saw it in my small sample, chances are it is pretty common.

      What happens is very simple, cops lie. So they take a person against whom they have no evidence and they tell them they have all this evidence against them. Then they tell them that they are going to be convicted no matter what but if they confess the judge will go lighter on them. And weak or less intelligent people fall for it. You don’t even have to be that dumb. You just have to not know that when a cop tells you “we have this evidence” chances are he is lying. If you don’t know that and believe him, you might make the perfectly rational decision to confess to something you didn’t do.

      Cops should not be able to lie to illicit confessions. All it does is get people to confess to things they didn’t do.

      1. Careful to believe even intellect could prevent false confessions, as given a plausible enough scenario, the most logical and rational might confess under duress.

        1. If you think you are screwed anyway, you might as well try to control the damage. Basically cops are lying scumbags who have not interest in convicting the right person. That is why you never talk to them.

          1. and when they want you to talk despite your protests, you have two choices, be afraid of the cops or make the cops afraid of you.

  24. I actually could not finish reading that. FUCK. I’m having a bad day and it just got worse.

  25. We are the 99%

  26. We are the 99%

  27. We are the 99%

  28. We are the 99%

  29. We are the 99%

  30. We are the 99%

  31. We are the 99%

  32. We are the 99%

  33. We are the 99%

  34. We are the 99%

  35. We are the 99%

  36. We are the 99%

  37. So Reason has a 900 character count limit now but can’t even filter blatant spam.

    Seriously, do you guys need help with this?

    1. Shit, dude, I’d help too if they’d let me. A whole fucking lot of us are programmers.

      1. The best part is you can outsource registration to OpenID and spam filtering to Akismet, or the whole thing to Disqus. Boom, spam gone. Ain’t even hard (and Twitter accounts are anonymous for all the anono-tards out there). What gives?

        I was kinda hoping that extension I made would be obsolete at some point, and it’s depressing to see how much more relevant it’s become.

        1. Yeah, personal blogger sites like Althouse have registration. It can’t cost anything.

          1. Having set it up myself, I can tell you that it costs pretty much nothing. If anything, it can save database space and speed pages up if you host comments externally.

  38. We are the 99%

  39. We are the 99%

  40. We are the 99%

  41. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  42. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  43. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

    1. Canadian Oil Gushers.

  44. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  45. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  46. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  47. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  48. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  49. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  50. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  51. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  52. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  53. Yeah, now I really wanna vote green! Just like that guy with the megaphone in Farragut Square totally made me a born-again Christian, and that shrieking PETA banshee outside Rosslyn Metro made me dump all my leather goods!

    1. We are the 69%

    2. We are the 69%

    3. We are the 69%

    4. We are the 69%

    5. We are the 69%

    6. We are the 69%

    7. We are the 69%

    8. We are the 69%

    9. We are the 69%

    10. We are the 69%

    11. We are the 69%

    12. We are the 69%

    13. We are the 69%

    14. We are the 69%

    15. We are the 69%

    16. We are the 69%

    17. We are the 69%

    18. We are the 69%

    19. Careful, it could be a sting – if you vote Green they will bust you.

  54. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  55. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  56. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  57. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  58. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

  59. Is it okay to rape a toliet?

    1. Invest in Canuck Oil Companies.

  60. There’s no way he would have insisted on giving the cunt some weed as a gift without her leading him on. She is whore and a pig.

    1. a* whore…fucking whore.

      1. a bitch and a whore and a pig.

  61. That was so amazing. Very good strategy in arresting drug users. But for me, it’s also bad, gaining the trust of the people but the end of the day you will destroy the trust he has given to you. I don’t know exactly what I feel. Black and white.

  62. We have video of the entire GOP Presidential Debate posted now on Common Cents…

    http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

    ps. Link Exchange?

    1. Now John Bachelor is complaining that they spent time discussing social issues and earmarks instead of entitlements and the fact that gov’t has made promises it cannot fulfill. Maybe I mistook what he was trying to say last night, if he was trying to say the same.

  63. See? Never give a gift to a girl until after she puts out.

  64. FUCK I hate Bill Maher
    “@Billmaher
    If #Obama cured cancer the Republicans wld say he’s trying to mandate what kind of cells we can have in our body”

    1. Maher, poor bastard. Sounds like he has moved on from coke to crushing Flintstones Vitamins and snorting them from the quality of that remark.

      1. I don’t know what’s worse, that he wrote that or that 100 people retweeted it

        1. If you are on twitter could you send him a message from me?

          Obama is not going prevent the tides from rising. He is not going to cure cancer. Fuck your God.

          1. Obama can cure cancer! He should simply give speeches about how bad cancer is, and cancer will slink away in shame.

            He’s kind of a touchy-feely version of Chuck Norris.

            1. The correct comeback to Maher was:

              “Well, if Obama actually caused cancer you would claim that it was all Bush’s fault.

    2. If Obama managed to do that, he might be the first self-curing cancer.

    3. I’m glad Maher has that huge shnozz of his because there’s no way he’s getting any air through his mouth with his lips wrapped so tightly around Obama’s cock.

  65. “He is no longer eligible to join the Armed Forces as he had planned to do upon graduation and is now attending community college.”

    Actually this is a success of the drug war.

      1. I think imhotep means it’s a success in that he didn’t join an extremely statist institution — the US military.

  66. Miss Rectal’s pain is delicious, isn’t it? Try trolling harder, rectal.

    1. I think Cooter finally dumped her.

    2. She seems to have gone on a bender

  67. Rather dead than green!

  68. What the hell happened to this place? I chime in like once a month and Rectal shit is all over the walls. Clean this shit up, Reason.

    1. Amen to that.

      If Reason doesn’t want to set someone to keeping their forums clean, they should at least consider setting up the kind of “karma” system that makes postings everyone hates disappear. I’ve seen this work well on other blogs.

  69. I think these pigs are just latent pedophiles.

  70. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  71. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  72. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  73. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  74. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  75. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  76. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  77. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  78. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  79. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  80. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  81. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  82. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  83. Hey everybody look at me crap all over this server.

  84. This is disgusting shit. When I worked UC to avoid even a whiff of entrapment, we would never try to make a case involving an opposite sex drug transaction. Even when totally above board,there is always the question of entrapment

    Also, pleading with a guy over and over to get you drugs is Blatant entrapment.

    Entrapment restrictions are there for a reason. Cops should never CREATE. A drug dealer, which is what entrapment does

    Heck. GOOD UC’s rarely even have to ask at all. Just place the,selves in the right place and the dealers swarm to you.

    It’s all bout psychology.

    I had one girl set me up with a dealer. Did she technically engage in a conspiracy? Sure. But we would never consider charging her. Its chippy, and it reeks of entrapment EVEN if it isnt

    1. that is the real dunphy… Buy I’m using a craptastic kb right now

      1. Surprised you’re not defending this one.
        Legitimately surprised.

  85. “These kids need to wake up. They need to realize they can’t be doing this.”

    He wasn’t doing this until you manipulated him into it, you stupid fucking soulless cunt. If you had never shown up, he wouldn’t be a convicted “criminal” and have his life ruined. But drugs are the problem here. Right. A painful, withering, deadly disease would be too good for you.

  86. sounds like a good premise for an HBO series, Whorecop

  87. Now thats what I am talking about dude.

    http://www.Going-Anon.tk

  88. Get the pics and dox the bitch. Make it so she can’t work in law enforcement anymore.

  89. He is no longer eligible to join the Armed Forces

    So it’s a happy ending after all!

  90. 21 Cunt Street.

  91. I’m not a violent man. But stories like this make me rethink that position.

    1. I can’t see how violence would help. But let’s make public this whore-officer’s name and photo, so she won’t be able to use this tactic on anyone again — because even if she were prosecuted, she’s sure to turn “gypsy cop” and show up on the police force of the next city down the road.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.