Is the Maddux case one of entrapment?

Is the Maddux case entrapment?

I looked at Daniel Maddux’s record and I only found a few traffic violations and a ticket for selling beer too late at night. It seems a bit odd that a 54-year-old without a previous record of controlled substance violation would become the target of that sort of sting operation.

I felt this may be entrapment so I looked up the words definition and it seems to vary, making it a good topic for debate.

First I will define entrapment, and then I will ask questions to compare that definition to what accrued in the case against Maddux. I found many similar definitions for entrapment but I will only include one because of limited space.“The act of government agents or officials that induces a person to commit a crime he or she is not previously disposed to commit.” http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/entrapment

This definition leaves room for debate. Did agents try to induce Maddux to commit a crime he did not intend to commit? It looks like the local police kept a close eye on him. They noticed the late night sale of beer in 2003, and his lack of registration in 2004.

Why is law enforcement trying to link so many unrelated arrests together? Does “Operation New Hight” use government agents to induce people to commit crimes, they might not otherwise commit? Police have a lot to gain — five motorcycles, a house boat, a bar and who knows what else. What is your opinion?

MARY TORMEY

Chubback