Hacker News Reader

I didn't even realize until this article that Carreon had actually donated to the campaign, apparently expressly for the purpose of then claiming that Inman was going to use the funds in a different way than promised? Except I have no idea how he can possibly argue that taking the picture of the funds is somehow wrong, when that was kind of the main objective of the fundraising (with the secondary objective being to then distribute the funds to the 2 charities).

View on HN

> different way than promised

Once the originally-planned $20k had been exceeded, Inman suggested that he would find some more charities that might benefit from the cash. This thought was abandoned shortly after Carreon cried foul about the "different way than promised". So, good-good for the bears, they'll get a bigger money pit to roll around in.

I'm not sure what bearing that has on taking a picture of the cash. Nor do I see how this could be related to the current lawsuit if Inman abandoned that idea.

So does he has entrapment in mind by donating a small amount?

Entrapment is only illegal when performed by cops. Besides, it isn't entrapment. Carreon did not induce Inman to perform the activity which Carreon claims is wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com