Can Words Alone Lead to a Conviction?
Posted on: Thursday, 8 May 2008, 00:00 CDT
The Utah Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday as to whether someone can be convicted of enticing a minor based on his or her words alone.
At issue is whether Utah's Internet Enticement statute is unconstitutional in stating that a person engaged in sexual speech over the Internet need only believe they are chatting with a minor in order to be convicted.
Attorney Ann Taliaferro said her client James Gallegos had been convicted of enticing a 13-year-old girl over the Internet based solely on an Internet chat he claims was purely sexual fantasy, the Deseret Morning News of Salt Lake City reported.
In actuality, the 13-year-old was an adult agent with the Utah Attorney General's Internet Crimes Against Children task force.
According to court documents, Gallegos had conversations of a sexual nature with the agent on two occasions in 2006. The agent and Gallegos arranged a meeting outside a school. While Gallegos did drive by the meeting spot, officers said he sped off. After police tracked his license plate number, Gallegos turned himself in.
Gallegos claims he had never believed the person he was chatting with was a minor. The reason he showed up at the meeting site, he said, was out of curiosity about this person.
Source: United Press International
 |
 |
User Comments (1)
| 1. |
Posted by Anonymous in Mpls on 05/08/2008, 14:02 While the thought of an adult enticing a minor into engaging in explicit acts is disgusting, I'm also (to a lesser degree, I'll admit) disturbed that people have been convicted of this crime when in fact, they've been talking to another adult all along. This has already happened in many other sting operations conducted by federal and local governments. Is it really "justice" when you convict someone of a crime they didn't actually commit? |
RSS Feeds