nick_davison writes: The Journal Star reports: Government inducement — by case law — is opportunity plus "something else." A man who declined what he was led to believe was a 15 year old girl was then sent angry then flirtatious emoticons. By definition, the police officer involved continued to aggressively pursue after the man expressed disinterest because of her alleged age. The judge, however, refused to allow the jury to hear this argument because he conceives them as nothing more than punctuation: "'Cause that's what an emoticon is. It's a form of punctuation," Because of the judges ignorance of the meaning of emoticons, the man is now in jail.