Evening star., 1933-01-02
Entrapment in Liquor Cases
Faces Public Condemnation

Popular interest attaches to the rul-
ing Of the United States Supreme Court
that it is illegal for Government agents
in law enforcement to undertake to In
duce citizens to violate the law in
order that case may be made. Vari-
Gus shades of opinion came from the
highest court, q minority holding that
cases so built should be dismissed by
the trial justice. One member Of the
court would uphold prosecution for Of
fenses, regardless of the use of "en-
trapment" methods.
There have been reports OF a dis
turbing number of cases." says the
Minneapolis Journal, 'in which there
has been reason to suspect that liquor
defendants were coaxed into crime in
order that they might be arrested.
Usually such cases have involved
spoilers working for ultra-dry States,
rather than for the Federal Govern
ment, and under arrangements by
which they were paid by the conviction
instead OF by the day, week or month.
Provocation of crime in order that
crime may be punished is, of course,
stencil in the noStrils of justice.
There is broad distinction between
the undercover man who employs
trickery to convince an actual boot
logger that he is all right and the
undercover man who employs trickery
to persuade an otherwise honest citizen
to commit technical violation OF law.
The greed of spoilers for unearned re-
wards and the zeal Of prohibition adj
vocates that countenances such abuse Of
authority, have had not a little to do
with. the alienation of large numbers
of former d-ys from their erstwhile sup
port of the prohibition cause"
1.-THE Supreme Court will be sus-
tanned by public opinien," declares the
Pasadena Post, ain its decision roasting
prohibition officials for leading men
into crime in order to get the oppor-
tunity to arrest them" The Rockford
Register Republic refers to local case
in this class in which a defendant had
been framed by men whose duty it was
to stamp out violations" and gives the
details OF the proceedings: 1T was
brought out in the testimony that a
Federal agent and an informer in en-
ploy of Federal prohibition agents in
Chicago had devised a plan to induce
the defendant to violate the law. Using
the name Of an acquaintance of the
youth, the informer went to the de-
fendant's home and urged him to get
two gallons OF liquor, the testimony
revealed. The defendant, a member
Of the local Illinois National Guard
Company, consented. After calling
several places in an attempt to
fulfill the request, he made ar
rangements for the purchase and
obtained a friends car to take the
informer to the home of the dealer.
After obtaining the liquor the informer
asked the defendant to take him to an
East Side address. When they drove up
in front Of the house the informer's ac-
complice and other Federal agents were
waiting" The Rockford paper advises
that 'an investigation of the local case
and summary action against those re-
Sponsible appears to be mandatory upon
Federal authorities"
"As indicated by Justices Butler,
Brandeis and Stone" thinks the Tex
arkana Gazette, "a trial judge, when
entrapment is apparent, should imme-
diately quash the indictment and dis
miss the defendant. No sheriff could
remain long in Office who deliberately
melted a man to commit burglary so
that he might make an arrest and OBJ
tain a conviction. Public opinion ought
not countenance such procedure In con-
nection with the enforcement Of the
Volstead act. These entrapment cases
are just part Of the weight in the scales
that has turned the public generally
against the eighteenth amendment and
the Federal prohibition laws and
brought about determination to get rid
of Federal police officers so far as cases
are concerned that involve no moral or
criminal wrong, but which merely are
related to acts made illegal by summary
law intended to prohibit something the
great majority of American citizens do
not want prohibited"
"The people win rejoice at the courts
position" AYERS the Indianapolis News,