1. Whether evidence of a criminal defendant's prior, constitutionally protected activity may be admitted to prove the predisposition element of the entrapment defense, and if so, whether such activity must be "similar" in nature to the charged crime.

2. Whether, to avoid prosecution of thoughtcrime, the predisposition element contains an objective "positional" component in addition to a subjective "dispositional" one. United States v. Hollingsworth, 27 F.3d 1196 (7th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (Posner, C.J.).

Whether evidence of a criminal defendant's prior, constitutionally protected activity may be admitted to prove the predisposition element of the entrapment defense, and if so, whether such activity must be similar' in nature to the charged crime