Federal prosecutors seeking to bolster resumes are quick to exploit such prosecutions for all they are worth. After all, there is little to be gained by reasonably handling the matter of a confused 20 year old, but sex up the story with mendacious exaggerations and comparisons to major acts of terrorism and you have the kind of federal prosecution that makes careers.
Cornell next faces a preliminary hearing for the attempted killing of a U.S. government officer and possession of a firearm in furtherance of an attempted crime of violence. Considering the ambiguity and expansiveness of federal crimes, as well as the fed's documented 99.5% conviction rate, his prospects seem dim.
The senior Cornell claims that his son was entrapped, but recent decisions have eviscerated what was left of the entrapment defense. It is virtually impossible to successfully implement an entrapment defense in U.S. federal courts, in spite of one being unquestionably entrapped.
The FBI's crime creation tactics are well recognized, but infrequently reported
A defendant cannot be exonerated of a crime on entrapment grounds merely because he or she can prove that police had no reason whatsoever to suspect even the slightest of criminal inclinations. What he must prove is that he was induced by police to commit the crime. This leads to the question: What constitutes inducement?
An officer or informant merely approaching a defendant and requesting that he commit a crime does not constitute inducement. To claim inducement, a defendant must prove he was unduly persuaded, threatened, coerced, harassed, or offered pleas based on sympathy or friendship by police. A defendant must demonstrate that the government conduct created a situation in which an otherwise law-abiding citizen would commit an offense. In short, it is a high bar for the defense to reach.
What Cornell will soon learn is that there are too many parties standing to benefit from casting him in as negative a light as possible and then punishing him accordingly. The media enjoys a frightening terror story. FBI agents need to show results for all of their anti-terror efforts. Federal prosecutors, seeking to advance up the judicial-corporate ladder, enjoy a symbiotic relationship with defendants like Cornell as the more deadly the plot can be portrayed, the more significant their prosecution will appear. There is a strong disincentive to deal with such defendants in a reasonable manner, based upon the specific facts of their case.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).