As there is no clear victim in this case the principle of harm will not be applicable here and would not be considered as an act that can be criminalised. This paper is about whether a victimless crime can be criminalised. Various theorists have argued in favour and against the criminalisation process. The argument against criminalisation is mainly on the violation of the individual autonomy of a person, where he will be criminalised for an act that he did as a part of exercising his autonomy and has not affected any other person in the process. On the other hand, one argument from the side favouring criminalization is that if such acts are not criminalised then they may cause social harm.
Thesis: Gross Negligence is not a State of Mind. No persons should be found guilty of a crime merely because he acted below the standard of the reasonable man. (FOR) In Criminal law by Card, Cross and Jones, the term mens rea is defined as “the state of mind expressly or impliedly required by the definition of the offence charged.” These ‘states of mind’ have routinely been understood to include “intention” and “recklessness”.
The case involving Tiger Woods and the Christensen shipyard company on the use of tiger woods name and photographs is a tort of invasion of privacy and a violation of his right of publicity. This right protects an individual to be free appropriation of ones persona. Therefore the defendants using Tiger Woods name and photographs in their ships can be asserted as a breach of right and an intrusion on his publicity for business gain. For instance the ship yard did not have First Amendment rights to present truthful facts regarding the use of Tiger’s name and photographs for that promotion, they did it without his consent. Besides, having the ship written privacy does not have any impact on the case.
Crime is a conduct that is prohibited by law and must have a severe sanction that is directed at a public purpose. White-collar and corporate crime is a type of crime that is committed by middle and upper class people about their business activities. Sutherland defined white-collar crime as a crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation (textbook). Rational choice theory is the result of cautious choices made by offenders based on their intentions of the risks and rewards of these choices. Criminals make rational decisions to commit a crime by reviewing all possibilities and outcomes (idealessay).
Too much insistence upon procedure some time may lead to acquittal of the accused and impunity on the offence. The judge in the court as an umpire is a misleading conception since one only judges according to the evidence submitted in court.
“The legal system gives the police the benefit of the doubt, but doesn’t give it to the average citizen,” ( Jaros para. 17). They are just like an average us if we brutally hurt someone we would surely have charges pressed against us what we did. “justice system designed to insulate police actions resulting in death” (Ali, Samee, Sherman para. one). In addition, the system is protecting them even though it may be obvious that they did the crime.
D) How important do you think the ‘fact’ of a criminal trial – the performance of prosecuting someone for an egregious violation of international law – is to the idea of transitional justice? Criminal trials act as a process for punishment. Even though in itself they do not directly deliver transitional justice, they act as a vehicle A primary purpose of transitional justice is to seek recognition for victims, as well as the promotion of peace and reconciliation. Criminal trials are concerned with interests of the defendant, they do not allow victims to share their stories.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that garbage placed at the curbside is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. The warrantless search of Greenwood’s garbage bags would violate the Fourth Amendment only if Greenwood showed a subjective expectation of privacy of the garbage and society accepts it as objectively reasonable. The U.S Supreme Court argued that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy for trash on public streets where animals, children, scavengers, and the public have access to it. Criminal activity that can be seen by any member of the public cannot be reasonably expected to be ignored by the police.
#PoliceThePolice is a call for accountability from the federal government against the misconduct of law enforcement officers. The Cato Institute defines police misconduct as “any action, on duty or off, by a person entrusted with police powers which would violate that trust to an extent that would cause those who entrusted the officer with said powers to reasonably question whether continuing that trust would expose the public safety to an unacceptable level of risk.” Misconduct can range from theft to sexual assault to brutality to raids to false arrest, but what enables officers to engage in these actions is that they believe that they are above the law and that they can get away with it. In a way, it’s true. Law enforcement officers are given specific powers by our government in order for them to do their jobs.
Finally, in her opposition Byrne contends that there was a special relationship between Hannon and the Co-Owners because: 1) Hannon had formerly served on the Co-Owners’ board (Compl. ¶ 13); and 2) that because he—as well as all unit owners—are members of the Co-Owners, and therefore the Co-Owners are vicariously liable for Hannon’s conduct. (Compl. ¶ 4). Both arguments fail. First Byrne correctly articulates that the relevant question regarding the Co-Owners liability for Hannon’s criminal activity is “whether the person or entity sued had control over the conduct of the third party who caused the harm by virtue of some special relationship.” Warr, 433 Md. at 183 (emphasis added).
The U.S. criminal justice system should not be allowed to used jailhouse snitches or informants, because this is at a disadvantage to defendants. This practice should not be eligible to be used for all types of crimes. To see justice done in any country, one must make sure that everyone gets a fair and impartial trial out of the system. If we disagree with prosecutors using snitches, then defense attorneys will be held up to the standards as well. If the defendant is innocent, defense attorneys need not to be worry to pay for testimony from jail inmates.
Depriving someone or a suspect of their rights is illegal. Title 18 of Section 242 makes acting under and color of law to deprive a person of the privilege or right protected by the Laws of the US or the Constitution (Deprivation Rights Under Color Law). This shows that the police can not keep someone from their civil rights. If people under any color of law deprives a suspect of their rights they will be consequented, and if any damage done to the suspect the consequences are worse. If any one conspires to deprive the suspect of their rights, immunities, or privileges protected by the Laws of the US or the Constitution, will be imprisoned for no more than a year or fined, if not both.
Habeas corpus means that the jailer must justify the prisoner’s unlawful imprisonment to court. In this clause, a writ of habeas corpus cannot be suspended because it is a fundamental civil liberty. However, if the case involves rebellion or invasion, then habeas corpus may be required. Clause 3 This clause talks about a bill of attainder and an ex post facto law.
Justice Douglas wrote the opinion. “The decision by the court was to overturn the officers ' convictions based upon the finding that they were coerced under the threat of the loss of their positions as public employees, specifically as police officers. The officers had a vested interest in their jobs, as it was their livelihood. The decision, needless to say, put public entities on notice that, although they have the right to compel employees to give a truthful statement to authorities about their actions as public servants, they could not also use the statement against them in a criminal action. The officers were entitled to immunity, as is any public servant.”