Muslims are presumed predisposed to terrorism, making entrapment defenses fail.

Evidence

Entrapment involves the government inducing individuals to commit a crime they would not otherwise commit. But entrapment defenses are difficult to pull off in court. The government only has to prove that the accused were predisposed to carry out the acts, even if the defendants demonstrate that the government induced them to do so. Predisposition operates on the assumption that Muslims are prone to terrorism. Juries readily embrace the notion of predisposition, and, as a result, the entrapment defense usually does not work. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 570

Categorization

  • XREF: The assumption of Muslim predisposition echoes the definitional thread established in Runnymede’s ‘unfounded hostility’ framing from chapter 1, and the Newburgh case parallels FBI informant practices discussed in other Islamophobia scholarship (e.g., Trevor Aaronson’s ‘The Terror Factory’). — connects to: Muslim bodies are treated as potential terrorists until proven otherwise — , Selod, Saher - Forever Suspect_…, 282; Suspicion of Muslims is based on association rather than evidence; Muslims are presumed terrorists until interrogation proves otherwise (+13 more)

Broader Connections