However, this fault does not necessarily mean she is actually criminally culpable of murder. In murder, once Actus Reus has been established Mens Rea must also be satisfied. Mens rea being ‘malice aforethought’ which can be established by “foresight of death or grievous bodily harm as virtually certain.” Therefore, to sentence Dot with murder it must be established that she foresaw either the death of the children or their grievous bodily harm as virtually certain. Considering she had no knowledge that the children had been poisoned and did not intend the events to happen, simply thinking they were suffering from a stomach ache; it is unlikely that the jury would find intent under the Woolin test. Nonetheless, if the jury did not find the necessary Mens Rea, she could instead be charged with the crime of manslaughter, which is committed when a defendant commits the Actus Reus of homicide but the killing is not sufficiently blameworthy to warrant liability for murder.
Many prosecutors use the threat of the death penalty as a way of getting a plea deal to get the offender off the streets. (Ewegen, 1994) Yet using the death penalty this way does not make it a deterrent against crime, it just keeps the judicial system from spending more money on trials. The death penalty has been abolished in many developed societies. The death penalty has no deterrent effect on capital crime. More over, the risk of executing an innocent person is unacceptable.
The "deterrent" theory is debatable. Serial killers, rapists, molesters etc. would rarely consider their potential demise via Capital Punishment prior to committing crimes. Criminals usually operate with the belief they will not be caught. 3.
I believe this because even though you cannot affirm what has been done, it does not give anyone the power to send someone to their death. If this was the case many innocent people would be going to their demise. I also believe the one who caught this person would be just as guilty for the accusation, especially if it is a false one. Death as a result of punishment for this law is unfair and should not be used in society today. My interpretation of Hammurabi’s third code is if someone takes another to a superior and has accused him of any
April 4, 2012 The abolishment of the Double Jeopardy Rule In The United States The Double Jeopardy Rule is one of the most controversial topics today. The U.S. Court system can overturn convictions due to evidence that proves innocence but yet there is a law banning a retrial to prove someone guilty. Therefore The Double Jeopardy Rule should be abolished to create equality in the Court systems, to provide justice to the victims of the crime, and to allow the guilty to be fairly punished. One of the most historic cases in the American Judicial System is the O.J. Simpson case.
Opponents of capital punishment say it has no deterrent effect on crime, wrongly gives governments the power to take human life, and spreads social injustices by disproportionately targeting people of color (racist) and people who cannot afford good attorneys (classist). They say lifetime jail sentences are a more severe and less expensive punishment than death. .Pro Death-Penalty "If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed
People at times have been confused with the difference between voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. But there is a substantial difference between the two that can help one to more thoroughly understand what the key difference is between the two. When it comes to voluntary manslaughter, the person commits the crime intentionally with reason, but involuntary manslaughter on the other hand is when someone is killed and the person accused of the killing did not intend to kill that person. For example; a doctor whom tried to do an illegal surgery or illegal practice to save or help someone and the patient ends up dying. The doctor had no intentions of a death occurring but a death ended up occurring, that would be involuntary manslaughter on the practitioner’s part.
Killing stands for the killer taking others’ life, but it is not the will of the person who is killed. Some people believe that it is good to help people relief themselves of pain, and do not need to suffer anymore. Some people would think euthanasia is a murder. Here is the question, is euthanasia a helpful thing or a crime? Should euthanasia be allowed?
Perhaps the most frequently raised argument against capital punishment is that of its cost. Other thoughts on the death penalty are to turn criminals away from committing violent acts. A just argument against the death penalty would be that sentencing an individual to death prevents future crimes by other individuals. However, criminals are not afraid of the death penalty. The chance of a criminal being sentenced to death is very slim.
It is extremely difficult to wrongly convict a person due to the fact that the defendant has multiple chances to prove their innocence. Lastly, the safety of our society is assured by eliminating these hazardous criminals from it. Everyone fears death. Many criminals would think twice about engaging in an illegal activity if they knew that their life was at stake. Punishing a person as an example to create fear in others is a tactic called deterrence.