WA: Caught in a Trap: Washington Is Leading with Smart Justice for Sting-Operation Defendants
In a powerful and overdue move, the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines Commission (SGC) has voted in favor of recommending alternative sentencing for certain sex offenses that arise from sting operations—cases in which there is no real victim. This decision, passed by a 7–2–3 margin, reflects a growing recognition that not all crimes should be punished equally, and that we must differentiate between true predators and people ensnared in law enforcement traps.
According to the Commission’s recommendation, individuals who committed sexual offenses in internet sting operations would become eligible for treatment-oriented diversion, rather than receiving a prison sentence by default. This isn’t just a matter of being “soft on crime.” The Sex Offender Policy Board (SOPB), which advised the SGC, based its recommendation on research showing that low-risk individuals in these sting operations often respond more effectively to therapy and supervision than to incarceration.
One of the most fundamental principles of justice is proportionality: punishment should fit not just the crime, but the circumstances and the person. Too many of the people ensnared by sting operations are not hardened predators; they are socially isolated or cognitively vulnerable. As defense attorney Brad Mayhew argued, many of his clients caught in these operations “are on the autism spectrum … with significant cognitive issues.” Entrapment by its nature creates situations where someone is tempted, or even coaxed, into behavior they might never have engaged in otherwise. Diverting eligible individuals from prison not only reduces costs for the state, but also helps people rebuild their lives in the community. The 2022 SOPB report pointed out that offering treatment rather than incarceration “lowers costs while still holding individuals accountable.” Moreover, alternative sentencing preserves public safety: by focusing on supervision and therapy, the system can monitor risk more directly and invest in preventing future harm.
This moment is one to commend Washington’s legislators, especially those sponsoring reform efforts like Senate Bill 5312, which sought to reduce the mandatory sex-offender registration for people caught in “Net Nanny” and similar operations. Senator Lisa Wellman (D-Mercer Island), who championed SB 5312, deserves praise for raising her voice against lifelong punishments for individuals who, under the old system, might be trapped in a legal purgatory despite posing minimal risk. This is courageous leadership: reformers willing to say that justice should not always mean “lock them up forever.”
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I am sponsoring a charged sex offender who is a first time offender and a vet. He was charged with 3rd degree possession in the state of Florida. There are many character references as well as his service record and work history. He attends SLAA meetings and has been sexually sober for years. Is there any value in presenting the mitigating circumstances?
There is.
Wouldn’t it be cool if those that turned down these attempts by law enforcement to entrap were given some kind of reward like maybe getting kicked off the list as they have clearly shown they have been cured of the incurable?
A positive step, now the life time supervision and registration for entrapment sting operations( net and nanny) cases must be eliminated
That’s a great step in the right direction. Congrats to Bruce, Joanne, and Bryan Glant, along with other sting operation victims in WA State who helped and everybody else who worked hard to make this happen.
What needs to happen now is for the fake child predator sting operation scam to be stopped altogether. Nobody should be allowed to solicit men online to engage in sexual conversations and invite to meet for a casual sexual hookup and then introduce an imaginary minor into those adult sexual situations. It needs to be made illegal for anybody to sexually exploit men or anybody else in that way. They should not be allowed to sexualize minors by creating imaginary minors who are luring random adult male strangers online to engage in sexual conversations and invite them to meet for a casual sexual hookup, which is exactly how these sting operations are conducted.
None of it has anything to do with trying to protect minors online from any real harm. It has everything to do with MONEY, EGOS, and real abusers using these sting operations to cause real harm to innocent men who were never a threat to minors or to anybody else. Courts should not even be allowing any digital evidence without having it first confirmed to be complete and not tampered with, since digital evidence is so easy to manipulate, and it’s very easy to hide exculpatory evidence in these cases.
We have also uncovered that some defense attorneys have worked to coerce the men to accept the plea deals or accept guilt for something they are not responsible for. They will gaslight the men, telling them it’s not entrapment and that they have no defense. They strongly discourage the men from taking their case to trial. There is one right now who is supposed to be defending one of these cases in Osceola County, from an April 2025 sting operation. This lawyer is not a good person at all. He has been reported and he needs to be investigated.
The sting operation victim has talked to a different attorney, and that attorney right away saw that this is a case of entrapment since it’s very clear that law enforcement reached out to him, responding to a sexual ad he placed on a site used by adults who are seeking a casual sexual encounter. Law enforcement responded to his ad, offered to meet him for a sexual encounter, and then introduced an imaginary 13 year old girl into that adult sexual situation. He was clearly not seeking minors for this, and his ad was very clear that it was about a casual sexual encounter. It’s not logical to assume that any minor would be responding to that ad, much less a 13 year old girl and one who was supposedly looking for a good time on her last night in town. It was a Saturday night, at midnight, when they contacted him. His attorney is telling him that it’s not entrapment, and that “f**k yeah” it is totally believable that 13 year old girls are doing this.
Let me know if you guys want to know who this attorney is. He needs to be exposed.
By the way, latest StingingBack episode: The Documentary “Predators” About the Chris Hansen Sting Operations: https://youtu.be/iEgOYqyrm_8?si=HcVeH8cGbzwmVvoB
Well written. Why hold? If others would benefit from not using this gent’s legal services, then by all means, advise so they can seek better counsel.
nice to hear some good news.