Principle of Double Effect in Entrapment In law, we want to see whether the person really intended to commit the crime or not. We want to know the amount of agency he had within himself to commit or not commit a crime. If she didn't have this free will, she would most likely be trapped and not deserve punishment. The people who are not trapped are the ones who would have committed the crime regardless of police involvement. Therefore they cannot be allowed to be trapped for a legal defense because they themselves initiated the causal shift in blame. The lawsuit was not brought by the police; instead, the police were simply able to deduce from certain circumstances that a crime was in progress and that an arrest was inevitable. Gerald Dworkin is a leading philosopher on the law of entrapment and highlights the fact that most arrests are left for ordinary citizens to report. laws are broken. The police, therefore, act as a reactive enforcement, depending on what citizens report to the police. There are few opportunities to give police more freedom to actively prosecute criminals. If the police were given more powers, perhaps they would be able to catch criminals before they cause serious harm to people. This rationalization is what leads to governments being sanctioned to initiate cases where criminals can plead innocent due to entrapment. Of course, the goal of the police is to create cases and circumstances that are not affected by the law of entrapment. Entrapment is a defense to a criminal charge in which the trapped individual becomes the victim of officials who abuse their power in hopes of deterring crime. In the process of deterring crime, government officials move from simply shadowing the int...... middle of paper ......g to supporting him. Letting the government break the law in hopes of deterring criminals seems rather counterintuitive. How do you think the criminal would react? Isn't this double standard more likely to infuriate and incentivize the criminal to act even more illegally? Perhaps this is pure speculation, but it is true that if we allowed this apparent contradiction (the police following and breaking the law) to exist, we would have to ask ourselves whether we trust our sovereign enough to know when it is appropriate to break the law for the best. of the company. I don't think we're ready to do that, so we need to continue to promote awareness about the law of entrapment through future cases. Ultimately, we know that even imprisoning more criminals is not the answer. If we can prevent people from engaging in criminal activity, we will be able to deter crime.