Are all lies created equal?
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/sh...created-equal/
Two quotes, one from the article linked to in that blog entry, and then one from the blog entry itself.
Quote:
When police induce a previously-innocent person to commit a criminal offense, the police have engaged in "entrapment." Entrapment is a defense to a criminal prosecution, even though a non-governmental actor offering an inducement of the same sort would not provide an excuse to the very same conduct by the defendant. If the government repeatedly and relentlessly tempts a person to sell drugs until the target finally does so, the target may prevail against a criminal prosecution with an entrapment defense. The basic rationale of this defense is not that the defendant did no wrong, but rather that the crime came from the government. We are thus more disturbed by the government's role in creating a crime and a criminal where there were none before, than we are by the criminal conduct itself, and thus we excuse the latter to deter and penalize the former.
When the government asks a baseball player questions about his own and his teammates' use of performance-enhancing drugs, it engages in a species of entrapment (though not one recognized as a common law defense to crime). The government knows that performance-enhancing drugs have become quite common in baseball, but its investigators and prosecutors have a difficult time gathering specific and accurate information on the subject, because players are predictably reluctant to speak openly. Understanding this state of affairs, the government conducts numerous interviews with players and asks questions, the answers to which are likely to be unhelpful and downright false. Armed with provable falsehoods, government officials no longer need to find out actual facts about drug use. All the government has to do is show that suspected baseball players lied.
Quote:
We're all on board with the idea that it's not a good thing to lie to law enforcement, at least I hope so anyway. But it is instructive to remember why that's a bad thing: because to do so interferes with law enforcement's mission to protect the public and punish wrongdoers. Does the rationale against lying still hold, however, if law enforcement is truly not interested in the underlying crimes it claims to be investigating?
Re: Are all lies created equal?
If I lie and say my g/f doesnt look fat in a dress or like whether I murdered and raped 852 children... I thnk the second one may be just a tad worse
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Its all very tidy to point out little things, BUT ..
They were investigating steroid use, they asked Tejada a question, and he lied mostly to protect his own ass and that is the gov'ts fault? Tjada COULD have just told the truth, he COULD have not been a lying rat that conveniently forgot how to speak english. But those are all for too high a standard to hold anyone to.
Like her traffic law example, it is impossible for police to pull over everyone who violates every traffic law so when someone breaks the law and gets pulled over by police it may be the police's fault ?
That's like asking your child if he ate all the cookies when you know he did, and you know he will most likely deny it. So you shouldn't reprimand him for lying about it ?
AH and TNP: the first example your a lying to protect someone else's feelings and the second you are lying to cover a crime, yes different and Tejada was lying to cover up a crime.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gRYFYN1
AH and TNP: the first example your a lying to protect someone else's feelings and the second you are lying to cover a crime, yes different and Tejada was lying to cover up a crime.
But a not a crime that the government was actually interested in nailing anybody on...which is the situation the article/ShysterBall brings up. Had the government been trying to prosecute Adam Piatt for steroid distribution, say, Tejada's lie would've been very bad...but the government wasn't doing that. They weren't even really investigating anything other than trying to figure out what baseball players did steroids. That's the 'entrapment' the article talks about. They set out "investigating" something and interrogating tons of players who know that the government isn't actually interested in prosecuting no-name players for steroid possession, but then the government nails players to the wall for lying, even though that lie didn't obstruct any investigation or interfere with with "protecting the public and punishing the wrongdoers."
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
But a not a crime that the government was actually interested in nailing anybody on...which is the situation the article/ShysterBall brings up. Had the government been trying to prosecute Adam Piatt for steroid distribution, say, Tejada's lie would've been very bad...but the government wasn't doing that. They weren't even really investigating anything other than trying to figure out what baseball players did steroids. That's the 'entrapment' the article talks about. They set out "investigating" something and interrogating tons of players who know that the government isn't actually interested in prosecuting no-name players for steroid possession, but then the government nails players to the wall for lying, even though that lie didn't obstruct any investigation or interfere with with "protecting the public and punishing the wrongdoers."
This article makes quite a damn leap in comparing lying when you're asked straight up by Congress if you took steroids or not & comparing that to entrapment. Is it then entrapment when they ask a murder suspect if he committed the murder as well? The thing is, players knew they were under oath before Congress, and lied. That's pretty damn cut & dry as far as perjury is concerned. It would be entrapment if Congressmen had prompted him to lie in order to help their own motives, and then come back & try to prosecute him for perjury, but I don't think that's the case here.
The thing is, MLB has anti-trust protection from the gov't, so yes, it is under Congress' jurisdiction and interest to make sure that they deem MLB to be law-abiding and 'fair' as it has certain protections most other corporations and businesses don't have (NFL doesn't have such protections to my knowledge). This is to pre-empt the, well if Congress wasn't putting their noses where they don't belong argument.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
The point is that the government isn't actually investigating into a crime. Their goal is not to find out who did steroids and prosecute those that did. They're investigating steroid use, but not with the intent of prosecuting anybody for it. The question that comes out of this is "Is lying that obstructs an investigation into a crime worse than lying that does not obstruct any such investigation?" To me, that answer is yes. That's why the murder example doesn't fit. The government is investigating a murder with the intent to prosecute the offender. That's different than the government investigating who did steroids, with no intent to prosecute them for the steroid use.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
The point is that the government isn't actually investigating into a crime. Their goal is not to find out who did steroids and prosecute those that did. They're investigating steroid use, but not with the intent of prosecuting anybody for it. The question that comes out of this is "Is lying that obstructs an investigation into a crime worse than lying that does not obstruct any such investigation?" To me, that answer is yes. That's why the murder example doesn't fit. The government is investigating a murder with the intent to prosecute the offender. That's different than the government investigating who did steroids, with no intent to prosecute them for the steroid use.
As someone who isn't interested in steroid use in sports, I admittedly haven't followed a lot of the steroid cases, but I think it would be hard for them to prove diffinitively if someone did steroids a decade ago, but maybe I'm just not up to speed on this. This also assumes that there is no statute of limitations on the crime of taking what the gov't deems to be illegal or restricted use narcotics (no clue what class anabolic steroids &/or HGH fall under). It would seem to me that they are simply going after a player's ignorance in prosecuting them for perjury. If more players would simply say what they did & who they got the roids from, maybe the gov't would start going after those developing & disbursing the roids.
Again, I don't have any vested interest in these MLB steroid cases & thus don't know any specifics, but that's been my view on what's going on since the initial Congressional meeting w/ sosa, mac & co
Re: Are all lies created equal?
That's basically correct. Since they obviously can't nail any of the players on steroid charges for a multitude of reasons including the ones you listed, but still want to them, they go after them for perjury, which is essentially the form of "entrapment" the article talks about.
I have no problem with them going after steroid distributers. Well, I do, but that's because I don't think steroids should be illegal, which is beside the point. Given that steroids are illegal, they should be cracking down on the developers and those distributing drugs. While they do do some of that, they're placing so much effort into nailing the users (and, again, since they can't actually nail them for use, they have to get them to perjure themselves) that the more "noble deed" gets lost in the shuffle.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
That's basically correct. Since they obviously can't nail any of the players on steroid charges for a multitude of reasons including the ones you listed, but still want to them, they go after them for perjury, which is essentially the form of "entrapment" the article talks about.
I have no problem with them going after steroid distributers. Well, I do, but that's because I don't think steroids should be illegal, which is beside the point. Given that steroids are illegal, they should be cracking down on the developers and those distributing drugs. While they do do some of that, they're placing so much effort into nailing the users (and, again, since they can't actually nail them for use, they have to get them to perjure themselves) that the more "noble deed" gets lost in the shuffle.
I agree that they shouldn't be illegal, hence why I care about these stories as much as I did about Phelps hitting the bong.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
The problem with the logic is the assumption that a person is legally required to tell the truth only in the case that there is an underlying crime. Congress investigates issues that are not criminal all the time, and they do it by interviewing the people involved. Those people are legally required to tell the truth - if they weren't it would be difficult for Congress to investigate anything.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
That's basically correct. Since they obviously can't nail any of the players on steroid charges for a multitude of reasons including the ones you listed, but still want to them, they go after them for perjury, which is essentially the form of "entrapment" the article talks about.
I have no problem with them going after steroid distributers. Well, I do, but that's because I don't think steroids should be illegal, which is beside the point. Given that steroids are illegal, they should be cracking down on the developers and those distributing drugs. While they do do some of that, they're placing so much effort into nailing the users (and, again, since they can't actually nail them for use, they have to get them to perjure themselves) that the more "noble deed" gets lost in the shuffle.
Well the Government loves getting the users in jail a lot more than the actual developers and distributors. The Drug sham...I mean War has shown that.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
While they do do some of that, they're placing so much effort into nailing the users (and, again, since they can't actually nail them for use, they have to get them to perjure themselves) that the more "noble deed" gets lost in the shuffle.
Yet I don't think they are intending to prosecute any player for using. They ask the player - did you use steroids? The player has two choices - answer honestly, face the consequences of their sport/fans and not go to jail. Or answer dishonestly and risk perjury. I don't think Congress would have pressed for charges against a player that admitted to using steroids - but they don't like to be lied to.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
I'm not sure how it is entrapment in any sense.
from http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/entrapment/
Quote:
In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit
None of those things were done to Tejada, he willfully lied in order to make himself look good.
Quote:
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. In order to be found to be a victim of entrapment, the entrapped person must have been willing and willing to commit the crime prior to the alleged entrapment. The mere providing of an opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. In order to find entrapment, there must be persuasion to commit a crime by the entrapping party.
Again he was ready and willing to lie, yes the government provided him an opurtunity by asking him a question, but never did they force, entice or persuade him to do so.
If your arguement is the Gov't did things a tad on the underhanded side, sure I'll go with that, but so was convicting Al Capone on Tax Evasion.
You've alreday stated that there was nothing the government could do if Tejada told the truth, which makes him look even dumber for lying.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kenny1234
Yet I don't think they are intending to prosecute any player for using. They ask the player - did you use steroids? The player has two choices - answer honestly, face the consequences of their sport/fans and not go to jail. Or answer dishonestly and risk perjury. I don't think Congress would have pressed for charges against a player that admitted to using steroids - but they don't like to be lied to.
Well if they're a no-name they're pretty much in a win-win situation. The government/media/fans aren't going to care about them.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
From the original article:
Quote:
When the government asks a baseball player questions about his own and his teammates' use of performance-enhancing drugs, it engages in a species of entrapment (though not one recognized as a common law defense to crime). The government knows that performance-enhancing drugs have become quite common in baseball, but its investigators and prosecutors have a difficult time gathering specific and accurate information on the subject, because players are predictably reluctant to speak openly. Understanding this state of affairs, the government conducts numerous interviews with players and asks questions, the answers to which are likely to be unhelpful and downright false.
This is saying that, when the government ask a person, about something they are investigating, and they suspect the person will lie to them, asking that question is Entrapment.
Is it all worthy of additional prosecution? well that depends on if someone thinks that the truth in the steroids issue will help moving foward, if so they punishing those who impede that is step in the right direction. If telling players that if they know of steriod use and are questioned about it they should divulge that info will help clean things up who knows.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
I think it's important to note that the author is saying it's a form of entrapment. As she says, though, it's "not one recognized as a common law defense to crime."
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kenny1234
Yet I don't think they are intending to prosecute any player for using. They ask the player - did you use steroids? The player has two choices - answer honestly, face the consequences of their sport/fans and not go to jail. Or answer dishonestly and risk perjury. I don't think Congress would have pressed for charges against a player that admitted to using steroids - but they don't like to be lied to.
This is why I agree with the article and think that it is a form of entrapment. Admit to a crime, which any normal human being would be "afraid" to do out of fear of potentially being charged with the crime they admit to, or don't admit to the crime and suffer through a perjury investigation and potential perjury charges. Even though we know that the government isn't likely to go after admitted steroid users, admitting that you committed a crime when the government has little or no evidence of that crime...well, let's face it, that's not smart either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
Is it all worthy of additional prosecution? well that depends on if someone thinks that the truth in the steroids issue will help moving foward, if so they punishing those who impede that is step in the right direction. If telling players that if they know of steriod use and are questioned about it they should divulge that info will help clean things up who knows.
I think it's obvious that knowing who did what in the past, while satisfying curiosity, does nothing to advance the goal of ridding the game of steroids. In my opinion, focusing so much on who did what 10 years ago draws attention away from preventing the problem now and in the future.
And, either way, I don't think it's the government's job to clean up the game of baseball.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
I think it's obvious that knowing who did what in the past, while satisfying curiosity, does nothing to advance the goal of ridding the game of steroids. In my opinion, focusing so much on who did what 10 years ago draws attention away from preventing the problem now and in the future.
And, either way, I don't think it's the government's job to clean up the game of baseball.
I agree that there is too much focus on what happened in the past, but that come from the deluded concept that steroid have had a major impact on the product on the field -which it seems les and less likely everytime new info comes up.
And I also agree that the gov't has gone too far down this rabbit hole - while some pressure was needed to prod the side into actually looking at it - they, as the gov't usually does, have gone way to far and are hunting flies with a shotgun.
I just fine that justifying what Tejada did as the result of some kind of entrapment a horrible misrepresentation.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Tejada chose to lie...there really isn't any way of showing that as entrapment...he lied, he chose to lie, he's an idiot.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gRYFYN1
I just fine that justifying what Tejada did as the result of some kind of entrapment a horrible misrepresentation.
I don't think anyone is saying Tejada was right for lying, or trying to justify it like that. The issue isn't Tejada. He's just an example of the issue - the government can't charge these guys with steroid possession or distribution, but they want to get them for SOMETHING, so they "investigate", hoping...well, more knowing...that they'll get a lie and can then get them for perjury. The last paragraph sums it up:
Quote:
It may be that the most disturbing aspect of the prosecution of dopers for lying, rather than for doping, is the hypocrisy inherent in the government's effectively lying to the courts about what it is really prosecuting while relying on a law that criminalizes lying. If the government cannot honestly and forthrightly gather evidence to prosecute the use of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball, then it has no business expecting players to provide honest answers to questions about such use.
Also, something from earlier in the thread that I just wanted to say something about because it's a huge pet peeve of mine...
Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
Tjada COULD have just told the truth, he COULD have not been a lying rat that conveniently forgot how to speak english. But those are all for too high a standard to hold anyone to.
I don't know if you intended anything by the bolded statement, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine, and most notably comes up when discussing Sammy Sosa's testimony in front of Congress where he spoke through a translator. We really need to stop demonizing Spanish speaking people for having the gall to deal with legal issues in their native language. While Tejada (or Sosa) may be fluent in English, being as it is his second language, he should absolutely handle such potential life-changing matters such as legal activities in his native language. If I learn Spanish and live for a little in Mexico, and then face legal trouble there, should I really be forced to deal with the problem while speaking in Spanish, opening up the door for potential misunderstandings or something due to me not being a native speaker? The language someone uses when handling legal issues should not be an issue whatsoever.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
I don't think anyone is saying Tejada was right for lying, or trying to justify it like that. The issue isn't Tejada. He's just an example of the issue - the government can't charge these guys with steroid possession or distribution, but they want to get them for SOMETHING, so they "investigate", hoping...well, more knowing...that they'll get a lie and can then get them for perjury.
You say that the government wants to "get them for something". What makes you think that? They haven't pursued charges against any player that has admitted to using any substance, they haven't pursued charges against any of the NFL players that have been caught using steroids - there is no basis for the idea that the players are going to be charged with steroid possession. Do I think that the whole thing is a waste of time? Yes. But if you are asked a question, under oath, before Congress - tell the truth, or plead the 5th amendment (I believe that you have that option). Yes, it will look bad - but that isn't Congress' problem.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
we see the world in such different lights hgm. the argument IMO is flawed from the beginning. the govt. was performing an investigation to determine the extent of steroid use in baseball, and since steroid use and distribution is illegal...it seems obvious the overriding goal is to determine all the particulars into how the drugs were obtained, who sold them and where those people got them from. The players blatantly lying are without question obstructing justice.
Quote:
The point is that the government isn't actually investigating into a crime. Their goal is not to find out who did steroids and prosecute those that did. They're investigating steroid use, but not with the intent of prosecuting anybody for it. The question that comes out of this is "Is lying that obstructs an investigation into a crime worse than lying that does not obstruct any such investigation?" To me, that answer is yes. That's why the murder example doesn't fit. The government is investigating a murder with the intent to prosecute the offender. That's different than the government investigating who did steroids, with no intent to prosecute them for the steroid use.
How do you find that the govt. isn't trying to prosecute anyone? I teach accident / incident investigation techniques, and while its not criminal investigation...the same principles apply into all investigations. Never go in trying to lay blame, because you most certainly will find it. If the investigators are doing their job...they know that criminal activity took place and are fact finding...trying to dig through the layers to determine the root cause of the problem. Lying to them obstructed their investigation. That is very clear and I don't understand how in anyway entrapment could be considered here. I really don't understand why this shyster is so adamantly against an investigation to steroids.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dickay
I really don't understand why this shyster is so adamantly against an investigation to steroids.
He did not write this article. He simply linked to it and made a short comment about it (which I quoted in my first paragraph). He didn't even give any opinions in his blog entry at all.
Re: Are all lies created equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
He did not write this article. He simply linked to it and made a short comment about it (which I quoted in my first paragraph). He didn't even give any opinions in his blog entry at all.
i didn't read the article, just your comments on it. i saw you mention shyster in your first post which is why i thought it was his. i skimmed this thread in fact...didn't read it entirely.
