[Enterprise]

The situations are different, but it still isn't entrapment regardless if the police are watching. Sometimes a police officer may simply be in an area where he observes a crime in progress and it isn't a sting operation. He still makes the arrest, and it still isn't entrapment.

The best example I can give of entrapment would be a situation where you have no criminal record and your are unknown to the police for any criminal propensities. You are minding your own business and someone approaches you and says something to the effect that he has some stolen Rolex watches and he would sell you one cheap. You take a chance and buy one and oops - it is an undercover operation. This is entrapment because it was the police who initiated the transaction.

On the other hand, you see someone you believe is selling stolen watches. You ask him if they are stolen and he says yes and you decide to purchase one anyway. OOPS! It's an undercover operation but you have no defense because you initiated the transaction.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

The situations are different, but it still isn't entrapment regardless if the police are watching. Sometimes a police officer may simply be in an area where he observes a crime in progress and it isn't a sting operation. He still makes the arrest, and it still isn't entrapment.

Right, and that's why things mentioned above - like speed traps and drug buys as part of ongoing investigations - are not entrapment. If a cop sitting behind a sign dings a speeder, well, the motorist was already speeding to begin with - they were already guilty when the cop observed their excessive speed. But your scenario doesn't fit what's going on with this particular sting operation, however.

The best example I can give of entrapment would be a situation where you have no criminal record and your are unknown to the police for any criminal propensities. You are minding your own business and someone approaches you and says something to the effect that he has some stolen Rolex watches and he would sell you one cheap. You take a chance and buy one and oops - it is an undercover operation. This is entrapment because it was the police who initiated the transaction.

Yes, and that seems to be what is going on here - trying to get people who don't have previous criminal records (at least none that the cops involved in the sting operation knows about) to commit a felony crime. Look at the article again, and we see some interesting things to be drawn from what it says:

1) There's nothing in the article that indicates that the sting was targeting a particular high-theft area or that burglars were working this area, and hence, would be more likely to be available to take the bait.

2) While the article does note that thefts from vehicles increase this time of year, again, there's no evidence that any person or groups of person with a known propoensity for this type of crime was being "stung".

3) Instead, the wording of the article suggests that the police were just laying out bait and hoping that someone, anyone, would take it and get a felony arrest. They're throwing out a net, and hoping to drag in the few who would commit a crime of opportunity - again, not knowing who passing by the car may be, or even that someone who did bite on the bait was previously part of that population.

I believe that what we see here is just a police effort to create criminals and justify a budget.

On the other hand, you see someone you believe is selling stolen watches. You ask him if they are stolen and he says yes and you decide to purchase one anyway. OOPS! It's an undercover operation but you have no defense because you initiated the transaction.

Which has no relevancy to what the police were doing in this case, since it was they who were initiating the transaction, so to speak.