You are a lawyer?
Yup. There has to be a substantial step in furtherance of the crime in order to convict on attempt.
As long as both know they are fantasizing, there’s no crime either.
Again, though, the problem is one of proof. A fact-finder (a jury, or a judge in a bench trial) is permitted to infer that a person intends the ordinary consequences of his actions. If you stay in your home and never actually show up at a meeting place to consummate your on-line relationship, then you can very convincingly argue that you knew it was a fantasy all along. But it’s difficult for a guy to claim he knew all along it was a fantasy if he gets in his car and drives to a meeting place.
Well, it seem like whenever they bust these pervs (and, judging by the new reports, it happens a lot) he has in his possession a bag containing lube and dildoes and rubbers and pot and pornography and quaaludes and booze and a videocamera…or some combination of the above. It actually adds a lot of impact to the story when they go through these bags on the videotape.
They often have e-mails and recordings of phone conversations where the intent of the encounter is made very specific. I actuall thin they have to have some proof of intent, I saw one bust when the 18 year old police cadet posing as a 14 year old girl was wearing a wire, and the police didn’t hop in and make the arrest until after he asked her if she wanted to go to his house and make love.