craigslist the governor was not operating in a foreign catering to pedophilia our child pornography it posted a bagel appearing ad on a well known and frequently used web site that contains everything from job many of the reservations it expresses come later in the conversation as things become more started to become one hundred as the agent continues to christie idea of meeting to push the idea of talking to the minor the reservations are expressed sort of  to the conversation for example if you start to look around the attendant apps page later approximately page eight twenty seven that sort of area in the joint appendix and i think about how the government agent was playing this role of a parent who had made a quote wrong decision about their children sexual education and nansook it recognizes that you know parental consent is not a defense to statutory rape but that it can have an impact on the self struggle to resist ordinary temptations and not so good knows this is particularly so where and it says and i quote the parent does not merely consent cast the activity as an act of parental sponsibility and selection of a sexual mentor as an expression of friendship and confidence and i think that's what you see when you see the later reluctance expressed what you see the agent coming back with is this expression of friendship and confidence you see the agent saying i am i've chosen you because your concern i have chosen you care about our comfort and you repeatedly see the agent did not ask in the first communication hold the daughter is in first communication he relates with some of his interests and he read said scenario not only anything about age there's at that point there's no illegality to disclose the age race back and already validating mr goelz you know sort of completely normal sexual interest she's already validating him she's already accepting him for who he is who he's putting out there which you see  snow i have argued and i continue to argue that there was insufficient evidence however there were other errors here that i think helped to explain why the jury may have returned the conviction despite insufficient evidence and i think that's where the engage in unusual be it will be going on sexual activity with an adult indicates a predisposition towards pedophilia you have pictures of mistreating girls alone in gauged in adult activity the pictures are shocking likely to the  jury you know perhaps even disgusting and you have these pictures being put forward they show no interest they should have nothing to do with children and there are the images that would really get in someone's head these come at the pedophile and that it doesn't it's an unusual sexual practice that he enjoys has no connection to children that should never have been ignited similarly you have the exclusion of evidence that would show mr hangal state of mind thought he had any contact with government agents there's a conversation that he has with someone purporting to be a fourteen year old where he's perfectly willing to engage in the same type of fantasy discussions  instruction needs to be tailored to the type of entrapment issue in that case the instruction there was not tailored it was very general it did not give the jury guidance it did not give the guy factors for predisposition it did not explain to the jury what kind of pressure would be excessive right kind of appeal would be and it did not tell them insured that this type of conduct could be inducement improper he was interested in i see no relevance for showing you know what exactly he was going to do with the child and i don't also see how a photo of himself completely alone completely sort of the other side being the submissive party has any relevance messages exchanged between the government agent and mr hinkle they were never actually introduced at trial the government sought to propose to introduce them but they only had one side of the conversation they only had mr hinkle to the agent  court said you have to lay the foundation of not letting the text and no matter what the court then do nohow one of the agents to read two of the texts and he did make an argument that he should have been allowed that agent to read the third text solely on that for that time of relationship develops there simply wasn't time for that year the proposal as put into the adding the said it was a mother daughter relationship with him to morally messages he knew that it was with an underage daughter and the person was still on board so that showed him to be willing to engage in certain type of role playing now the role playing he was playing the role of the minor within the first few messages you see him putting out around him posing exactly the same kinds of activities which he's playing today and then in the gross playing the role of the minor so there was a link between what was shown and we post propose to do that the jury could reasonably consider this evidence this was a person who did out nearly fantasizing words about these kinds of encounters but a person who went further than that and for those reasons it was a boost enough reason to let them be put from the jury for the jury to decide what to do with that that's worth noting also the defense counsel made good use of them for the defense because a big part of the defense was that he did this as sort of an adult type of activity and that some of the things in the truck were actually for that purpose the pictures actually helped in making that argument which is one of the reasons why the why the government only called attention to one of them that's counsel brought out many more of them cross examination because in fact they were  approximately four years earlier the context of which was unknown and certainly the judge was not required to consider them sufficiently related to the circumstances of this case to require that they be admitted as sort of present sense impressions  or a sense of present intent case was clear on this score it's just the case that they the circumstances have to be shown to be similar enough that we were driving conclusion that the reaction in one case would be the same as the reaction in the case that we really care about this case worse the defense argues instruction should be given to us to show that they represent the the questacon of the law and the well was argued to be included was information that came from outside the circuit either from the eighth circuit  or in the gun case where the coming case from the ninth circuit this court hasn't adopted that specific language hasn't adopted that specific list of factors that was used in the inducement instruction particularly as there is no reason to believe that the court had an obligation to include discussion the disc messing with things to be considered by a word in deciding whether to give an instruction or entrapment in the first place so this is the simply it says these are the things the court must consider in deciding whether to instruct other trainer that may be different thing than what pictures he objected to their introduction at trial he maintained that objection from the beginning of the end of course once the pictures are in he has to you know that's what a defense attorney does has to do what he can with the evidence that's there but he did not waive any argument about that and they don't become harmless simply because mr hinkle made arguments about them these are i would argue searing images that were really stuck out they weren't sent to anyone in the case and they would have really stuck out in the jury's mind sort of identifiable clothing and then there's like you know two today adult lingerie or they you know we don't really know what they are but he's completely alone he's an adult he can take those pictures i would also add to that the fact  that the conversation with the previous chat was the very end of the appendix that chat with a forty year old woman the fact that that was four years earlier is what makes it relevant and it's very similar to the language that mr engel uses is very similar