4) How do you know that there "probably" was no misconduct by the FBI agent?

Because it was an agent of the ALABAMA Bureau of Investigation. How
can you involve a Federal agent before the suspect has stated an
intent to cross a state line in pursuit of an unlawful activity?

David Ames

(Nick) wrote in message
. com...
ospam (Jerome Bibuld) wrote in message
...(to Nick):
What makes you think that Dr. Sherzer behaved poorly in this case?

Thomas Mo The law is not a light for you or any man to see by; the law is
not an instrument of any kind. The law is a causeway upon which
so long as he keeps to it a citizen may walk safely.
--Robert Bolt (A Man for All Seasons)

If Alex Sherzer had exercised more prudent judgment, then he presumably
could have avoided ever becoming a party to the FBI entrapment.

'Even an innocent man must take ordinary precautions to defend himself.'
--Charles Dickens (Bleak House)

Dear Mr. Bibuld,

From what has been posted on this forum he seems to me to have acted like
a normal adult male.

Not like *every* "normal adult male", in my opinion.

You seem to suggest that Alex Sherzer's "normal adult male" behaviour was like
a purely mechanical response to a sexual stimulus. But Dr. Sherzer did have
choices, and he could have made different ones. Surely, you believe that
Dr. Sherzer had volition over his own actions?

I should have been careful enough not to discuss the possibilities of any
sexual relations even if the underaged young lady had introduced the subject.

He responded to a "personal" advertisement of some sort, including a
photograph (neither of which has been posted on this bbs) by a young(er)
woman. He and the advertiser developed an internet friendship, during
which, I infer, she began to ask him for advice concerning her life and
he responded to such requests.

When close friends have asked me for personal advice, I usually have attempted
to be as helpful as I could be, though sometimes there might have been a
potential conflict of interest toward my relationship(s) with someone else.

Her mother -- whose efficacy as a loving parent may have been reflected
most accurately in the fact that the young woman had incurred an unwanted
pregnancy and had been incarcerated -- "found" a printout of something (we
don't know what) Dr. Sherzer and/or the young woman had communicated via
email.

I feel less qualified than you do to make a moral judgment about the mother.

The mother, who appears to me to have held her daughter in utter contempt,
involved an agent of the government, who then took over the young woman's
email. (We've heard nothing of the young woman's postion regarding this
and other infringements of her human rights. No one has arrested the
government agent or the mother, despite the Federal and State laws against
restricting the human rights of others.)

Fifteen-year-old persons have not been accorded the full legal rights of
adults.

Evidently, Stan Booz (who has condemned Alex Sherzer) seems to believe (or
have believed) that GM Zsuzsa Polgar must be under the control of Paul Truong.

Dr. Sherzer was entrapped by the government agent.

That's what the jury concluded in reaching its verdict for acquittal.

(For all we know, there may have been NO hint at all of a sexual encounter
between Dr. Sherzer and the young woman before the advent of the government
agent.)

That might be true.

What, then, did Dr. Sherzer do to incur all this animosity? NOTHING. He
was 32 years old and the young woman was almost 16 years old. I have a
74 year old brother who has lived with a 40 year old woman for a decade.
He was more than twice her age when they started living together. So what?

Were they not both adults (of legal age) "when they started living together"?

It is true that Romeo was only 14 years old, but he ACTUALLY DID SEDUCE a
13-year-old girl.

In modern professional theatre and film, Romeo and Juliet always have been
played by older actors.

(Dr. Sherzer was "seduced" by the government agent in the guise of the
young woman.) I doubt that any of those who have cursed and condemned
and laughed at Dr. Sherzer on this forum feel the same way about Romeo.

I was not among "those who have cursed and condemned and laughed at
Dr. Sherzer on this forum". I hoped that Alex Sherzer could receive a fair
trial, and I decided to withhold my judgment until after that trial:
I respect the verdict.

By the way, Romeo and Juliet met a tragic fate.

As has been pointed out here (by me, among others), the majority population
of the world considers the menses a legitimate sign of womanhood. NO ONE
on this forum has denied this. (The young woman had been pregnant, so I
guess she may have had one or more periods.)

Evidently on account of better nutrition, the average age of the menarche has
been decreasing throughout many societies in the world, whereas the emotional
maturity of these "new young women" has not been proportionally increasing.
In short, young bodies tend to be ready for sexual activities before young
minds are prepared for all the potential consequences.

I don't know any "new young woman" whom I should have regarded as a fully
emotionally and intellectually mature adult woman at the age of her menarche.
Being able to procreate does not necessarily imply one's mastery of all adult
responsibilities. For example, consider Sam Sloan.

Dr. Sherzer, from what we have seen on this bbs, has acted as a perfectly
normal and civil adult male, in a very sick society.

I believe that Alex Sherzer could have acted more wisely and responsibly.
And I expect that he should do so in his future relations with young women.

Whenever I have been asked about how I should feel if I had a fifteen-year-old
daughter, I really cannot answer that question definitely because my daughter
would be a person with her own individual levels of emotional and intellectual
maturity, not a legal or a social abstraction.

'Those who never have been guilty of any indiscretion are generally people
who have very little active virtue.'
--Frances Moore Brooke (The History of Emily Montague)

--Nick

(David Ames) wrote in
message . com...
Nick wrote:
(context snipped)
4) How do you know that there "probably" was no misconduct by the FBI agent?

Because it was an agent of the ALABAMA Bureau of Investigation.

I just *quoted* the term, "the FBI agent", from Larry Parr's post here,
"Entrapment is Worse than Intent", wherein Mr. Parr wrote about:
"...the FBI agent bringing race into e-mail messages..."

How can you involve a Federal agent before the suspect has stated an
intent to cross a state line in pursuit of an unlawful activity?

Would Larry Parr care to answer that question?

fiat lux
--Nick

(Nick) wrote in message . com...

fiat lux
--Nick

et erat lux et bona erat.

David Ames