Err no.
While it is true that girls do lie about their ages (they do this a lot - having been a barman in a pub, I can personally attest to this) I would be very surprised if Police sting operations used this tactic.
This is an argument from incredulity. Sometimes incredulity is deserved, but not in this case. It happens.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/08/sexual-predator-stings/13770553/
"When men, many of them younger than 25 with no criminal history, respond, officers switch the bait and typically indicate their age is really 14 or 15 years old. However, sometimes the storyline isn't switched until the men, who were looking for legal love, already start falling for an undercover agent."
Their whole point is to catch men with a predilection under-aged girls.
That is naive. Their whole point is to do a job and get paid. What's the job? Arrest perps. There is a strong incentive built into the system to expand who qualifies as a perp. We might
want them to catch men with a prediliction for under-age sex, and that might be what they even tell themselves they are doing, but it's not the way the system actually works.
Using a girl over the age of consent totally defeats the point of the sting,
Only if you mistake what the point is.
and the moment it comes out in court that the bait was of consenting age, the victim of the sting has no case to answer - case dismissed.
No. mike81 is right about that. That isn't the way the law works.
Consider for a moment a case of
actual pedophilia. An underage girl says she's 18, a man gets interested in her, she reveals that she's actually 15 and below the age of consent, and they have sex. Did the man violate the law? Yes. What if they didn't have sex but he tried to have sex? Yup, that's still against the law.
So if it's illegal in an actual case, is it illegal in a sting operation? Well, things get a little more complicated. But they don't become more complicated because there was no violation of the law. They become more complicated for two reasons. First, law enforcement is not permitted to induce illegal behavior, and in a bait and switch where the "victim's" age is switched, that may have happened. Second, if there is no actual victim, no actual sex with anyone, then the law depends entirely upon intent. So what the perp
believed about the age of the "victim" is critical. And switching the age confuses that matter.
But jut because it's confused doesn't mean the perp has nothing to answer for in court. The perp has to convince a jury that he didn't believe the switch. But if he really didn't, that doesn't mean he can convince a jury that he didn't. Nor is it harmless to get arrested and have to go to trial even if you are cleared of the charges. For an example of why a perp might not believe the age switch:
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...-johns-protest-charges-predator-tag/13754207/
Lee admits he planned to pay for sex with an adult and said several factors led him to believe the woman at the other end of the text message was 18 or over, despite her claims.
How else would she book a hotel room? If she was really a runaway, wouldn't her parents track her down by her cell phone or credit card?
The decoy asked him if he would be willing to pay more because she was younger than the ad stated. Lee attempted to use marijuana as a bargaining chip rather in lieu of upping the price, according to the police report. Lee believed the woman was just trying lie//lying// about her age to squeeze more money from him, he said.
