Fоr severаl mоnths, lаw enfоrcement investigаtes an organized gambling ring believed to be operating illegal sports betting throughout the region. Investigators suspect that Casey, a local business owner with no prior criminal record, may have connections to individuals involved in the operation. An undercover officer posing as a representative of the gambling organization approaches Casey multiple times over a six-month period. The officer repeatedly asks Casey to allow bets to be placed through Casey's business and suggests that participation could generate substantial income. Casey initially refuses several times, stating: "I don't want any part of illegal activity." Over time, the undercover officer develops a friendship with Casey, frequently discussing financial hardships and emphasizing how participation could help Casey avoid bankruptcy. Eventually, Casey agrees to manage betting transactions and collect money for the organization. Casey is later arrested and charged with operating an illegal gambling enterprise. Casey argues that law enforcement improperly induced the criminal conduct. Analyze whether Casey may successfully assert the defense of entrapment. Minimum Response Length: 250 words Your response should: Define the defense of entrapment. Distinguish between subjective and objective entrapment. Explain the concept of predisposition and why it matters. Analyze whether law enforcement merely provided an opportunity to commit a crime or improperly induced criminal conduct. Discuss what additional facts would be important in determining criminal liability. Support your conclusions using legal reasoning and concepts from the module.