RATIONALE: The legal premise of the jury instructions was sound. Professor Glanville Williams states, on the basis of both UK and US authority, "To the requirement of actual knowledge there is one strictly limited exception...[The] rule is that if a party has his suspicion aroused but then deliberately omits to make further enquiries, because he wishes to remain in ignorance, he is deemed to have knowledge." The Model Penal Code, Section 2.02(7) states, “When knowledge of the existence of a particular fact is an element of an offense, such knowledge is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist." In several cases, the Supreme Court has applied the Model Penal Code definition of
This distinction in the law is termed as functions. According to the amendment, the judge is designated to try the law whereas the jury can try according to facts. This distinguishing between the law and fact is important as it gives the legitimacy to the decree of juries. At the same time, the amendment prevents from violation of the justified legal anticipations of the
Procedural due process and Substantive due process may seem similar but they have vast differences. The overall purpose of due process is to extend justice and fairness to the individual in relationship to government. Procedural due process is an analysis of the procedure required by the constitution when states seek to deprive people of life, liberty or property. Procedural due process is made to protect individual citizens from the coercive power of the Government by ensuring the adjunction process under valid, impartial and fair laws. Procedural due process is a basic claim under the fourteenth amendment that there is an absence of fair process.
The exclusionary rule is a lawful principle that the United States use, which expresses that the confirmation that was powerfully utilized by the police can 't be utilized in a criminal trial. The motivation behind why this is done it’s for the security of the established rights. In addition, the exclusionary rule states that in the Fifth Amendment no one "should be denied of life, freedom, or property without due procedure of law." The exclusionary rule additionally expresses that in the Fourth Amendment it is intended to shield residents from unlawful pursuits and seizures. It also applies to the infringement of the Sixth Amendment, which ensures the privilege to counsel.
In the beginning of Taking Rights Seriously, Dworkin enforces that his main idea is to interpret and defend a liberal theory of law based on individual rights. His main theses is the idea that individuals can have rights against the state that are more important than the rights created by legislation; citizens have moral rights against their government. I will summarize Dworkin’s main arguments on rights in his book called Taking Rights Seriously, analyze his claims, and evaluate his theory’s ability to unveil his believes on
In a democracy, freedom of speech and the press must be accorded great respect, but other values such as national security, the protection of reputation or public safety sometimes conflict with First Amendment guarantees. Discuss the approaches that have been used by the Supreme Court to define the limits on expression. How have these approaches been applied in specific cases? Several restrictions have been formulated on expression. The first approach used by the Supreme Court is the Clear and Present Danger.
A “judicial review,” is a court’s authority to examine an executive or legislative act if it shows anything conflicting to constitutional values. The type of power that allows a court to examine any of the actions in the branches is what the judicial review does. The United States Supreme Court possess the highest authority and is over both the federal and the state courts in the country. When a judicial review is conducted it helps the state courts determine whether or not statutes are valid in the state. If any of the state’s laws is in direct violation of the United States Constitution, then it is deemed those statues are not valid.
Rawls acknowledges that there needs to be regulations on when civil disobedience is justifiable. Civil disobedience should only be used in the most serious violations on the principle of equal liberty and clear violations on the principle of the principle of equality fair of opportunity (Rawls, p. 372). Whether Rawls’ principles of justice are being met is subjective, so even in a just society it is arguable as to if they are being met and to what extent they are being met (Rawls, p. 372). Raz’s first critique of Rawls theory of civil disobedience, questions the use of non-violence. Raz believes that non-violent disobedience can be drawn out compared to violence, and end up being more detrimental to society (Raz, p.
A constitution is a set of fundamental and entrenched rules governing the conduct of an organisation or nation, establishing its concept, character, and structure. It is usually a short document general nature and embodying the aspirations of values of its writers and subjects. (Business Dictionary, 2015). A constitution is the ultimate authority; any action, which contravenes the rules of the constitution, will be both unconstitutional and unlawful. It will also help identify the rights and freedoms of citizens through a bill of rights, which operates both to protect citizens and to restrict the power of the state.
General examples include the laws regarding torts (laws against any wrong doing for which an action for damages be brought), contracts, and real property. A specific example of a substantive law is a law prohibiting trespassing on another’s property. Substantive law, which refers to the actual claims and defences whose validity is tested through the procedures of procedural law, is different from procedural law. Substantive law is the statutory or written law that defines rights and duties, such as crimes and punishments (in the criminal law), civil rights and responsibilities in civil law.