" Your Government at Work: Trying to Prosecute Restaurateur for Tweeting Photo of Underage Kids Who Tried to Buy Beer "

Damn, does the stupidity of LEO know no bounds ? These guys need a different vocation !

What if these "kids" in the sting were really 21, yet presented fake IDs that showed they were 17? If he sold them beer, would it be illegal?

What if these "kids" in the sting were really 21, yet presented fake IDs that showed they were 17? If he sold them beer, would it be illegal?

If the restaurant owner actually asked if the identification's were legitimate, then liability would fall upon the "kids". I've heard of many youths getting fake id's and getting into clubs. But if the owners are aware these kids are under age, then the burden would lie on the owner of the business.

" What if these "kids" in the sting were really 21, yet presented fake IDs that showed they were 17? If he sold them beer, would it be illegal? "

What if ? what if ? what if ?

I am not an attorney, but I would think not, since they were in fact 21.

Since it was, in your example, a " Sting Operation ", I would think that the officers involved would be guilty of " entrapment ", and depending on the law of that state would be subject to jail time, sanctions, fine, being fired, and subject to civil punishment.

"I am not an attorney, but I would think not, since they were in fact 21."

I agree.

The reason I asked was that the "young" girls used in a sting by Dateline in "To Catch a Predator" were over 18. Granted, they said they were younger and indeed they looked younger. The men who showed up were arrested for a sex crime.

Arrested why? No actual "child" was harmed -- physically or emotionally. There was no "child" abuse of any sort. I'm sorry, but I don't see the crime.

"But if the owners are aware these kids are under age, then the burden would lie on the owner of the business."

According to the article, these kids were 17 and their ID showed they were 17. They were testing to see if the owner would sell them alcohol despite them being underage.

But what about a police department that has a policy of not using minors in sting operations (for, say, safety concerns)? So they use someone who is actually 21 but looks 17, and who presents a fake ID that says he's 17?

If the owner sells him beer, did he break the law? After all, he's really 21.

They would not be guilty of sale of alcohol to a minor if the kids were not minors. But if the bar owner thought that they were minors and sold them alcohol, it would be attempted sale to a minor, and he could be convicted of attempt.

People that have a license to engage in the business of selling alcohol beverages have a huge responsibility to NOT let people under age acquire same. That is a legal responsibility & a legal liability if they do not. They usually have a huge financial investment in their store, and if they get caught, they will be shut down for some time. That is a huge $ loss

I use to know people that were in that business. Their competitors worked together to keep kids from getting booze. One guy caught a kid trying to make a buy. The clerk thought something was hinky. The owner looked at the ID, and could tell it had been altered. He photo copied the license, and wrote down the license number on the car, with a good description of the kid and the car. First he called the local PD, and then he called several of his competitors and passed the info to them. The kid went to another store, got turned down, and when he pulled out, the cops got him. The kid paid a big fine for an altered DL. I heard the kids Dad was not to happy, and took the kids car from him. Wah, wah, wah. LOL

But what about a police department that has a policy of not using minors in sting operations (for, say, safety concerns)? So they use someone who is actually 21 but looks 17, and who presents a fake ID that says he's 17?

Of course police use minors. So does the FBI. The point I made is that either the "kids" were offering themselves for sex or to purchase alcohol under false pretenses or they were working as a team Sting Operation. This is where "entrapment" can get messy and the issue then becomes an illegal sting due to fruit of the poisoned tree doctrine. Getting information under false pretenses taints the information and therefore is thrown out in court by arguments made by attorneys for the defendant.

If the owner sells him beer, did he break the law? After all, he's really 21.

If the owner was presented with an id showing an kid allegedly underage and wanting to purchase alcohol and the owner sells beer to this underage kid, the owner goes to jail (despite the fact that the kid is 21). The owner relied upon information that should have stopped him right there and proceeded no further.

As a matter of fact, if the owner was smart he would have a notice placed in front of his store informing underage kids or anybody else for that matter that the use of false identification will get the underage some time in jail and that the owner requires the right to deny service to anybody they suspect of holding false identification or failing to produce other forms of identification to prove they are of legal age to purchase alcohol, cigarettes, etc.

"If the owner was presented with an id showing an kid allegedly underage and wanting to purchase alcohol and the owner sells beer to this underage kid, the owner goes to jail (despite the fact that the kid is 21)."

But wait a minute. You said that presenting a fake ID was illegal. Can the police break the law in order to enforce the law? Isn't that the definition of entrapment? And once this gets to court, can't the defense claim that no crime was committed since the buyer, after all, was actually 21?

Another thought. What if the buyer was 50 years old and presented an ID showing he was 17? No sale?

Here's my point. When people of legal age represent themselves as below the legal age in order to entrap another, I have a big problem with that. The law was written to protect the young. If the so-called "illegal" act did not actually involve a younger person, I say the law does not apply.

Can the police break the law in order to enforce the law?

Isn't that the definition of entrapment? And once this gets to court, can't the defense claim that no crime was committed since the buyer, after all, was actually 21?

If the police can break the law to enforce existing law then we have no laws at all. The burden of proof lies within the accuser and not the accused.

It is against the law to present false identification when making purchases of any type let alone using false id to write a check. You can do some very serious jail time. Keep that in mind.

Now, when people of legal age misrepresent themselves on their id, they are breaking the law and therefore subject to penalties the courts deem are fit.

If law enforcement want to catch somebody purchasing alcohol using a false id, there should be cameras in those public areas to catch the person using the false id. This also applies to law enforcement because if you are using an illegal tactic to make your case against someone, you have nobody to blame but yourself when your case is thrown out of the courtroom for "tainting the evidence".

Let's put this another way, using false id to obtain something is no different than impersonating a police officer using a fake badge.