Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||State entrapment||Authors:||Ho, H.L.||Issue Date:||2011||Citation:||Ho, H.L. (2011). State entrapment. Legal Studies 31 (1) : 71-95. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2010.00176.x||Abstract:||This paper addresses a cluster of issues. What is state entrapment? Why is it objectionable? Is it wrong to prosecute the entrapped? What should the court do when the case is brought before it? These questions are intertwined. To know what is wrong with state entrapment, we must be clear about what it is; our understanding of what constitutes state entrapment, with its negative connotation, is shaped by what we think is distinctively wrong with it; and, we cannot know how the court should deal with state entrapment unless we identify the precise problem to which a judicial response may be required. The right response is a permanent stay of proceedings. A stay should be granted because the executive does not come to court with clean hands. It lacks the standing to blame the entrapped for what he or she did, and the state lacks the standing to condemn the person for the same. © 2010 The Author. Legal Studies © 2010 The Society of Legal Scholars.||Source Title:||Legal Studies||URI:||http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/45356||ISSN:||02613875||DOI:||10.1111/j.1748-121X.2010.00176.x|
|Appears in Collections:||Staff Publications|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
checked on Jul 19, 2019
checked on Jul 21, 2019
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.