Factual Causation and the De minimus Rule uses the ‘But For test’. It asks ‘But for the Defendant’s action would harm or loss of property have occurred?’ This is shown in R v White where without White poisoning his mother’s drink, she would have died anyway as a result he was held to not be at fault for her death and was not guilty. Legal causation aims to find who is most
The fact that the prosecutor works in the interests of the state can be seen as the underlying factor here. The prosecutor can get away with misconduct; because if it were proven that the prosecutor was actually responsible for misconduct it would greatly undermine the goal of the state, which is to seek justice. If the prosecutor is misconducting themselves then it gives the impression that the prosecutor is not interested in justice, but more so a conviction, whether it be done so legally and ethically, or not. Prosecutorial misconduct happens, and
Unless the government is able to prove the existence of these elements, it can't obtain a conviction in a court of law. The due process model is a model of the criminal justice system that stresses that every criminal justice conclusion is built on scrupulous information. Due process stresses the adversarial process, the rights of defendant and the rights of the formal decision-making procedure. It is vital to realize that courts allow individuals to defend themselves based on entrapment, self-defense or insanity. These, however, must be proved appropriately to allow courts practice fairness in defenses.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity. All these points are valid, but they are forgetting about the rights of people and what they stand for. I would think people would want defendants to be punished fairly and not have an opening, where they could possible get their case dropped because of something illegal done on the prosecution or law enforcement
... We cannot know whether the murderer on death row suffers more than his victim suffered; however, unlike the murderer, the victim deserved none of the suffering inflicted. ... Although penalties can be unwise, repulsive, or inappropriate, and those punished can be pitiable, in a sense the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. ... To regard the
Reasonable suspicion is a lawful conventional of evidence in Combined Declares law that is less than potential cause, the lawful conventional for busts and should get, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized doubt or 'hunch' "it must be depending on "specific and articulable facts", "taken together with logical implications from those facts". The law on admissibility of a person noticing and identifying is complete of double-speak. Despite lavish and noble terminology such as-“A criminal defendant may be deprived of due process of law by an identification procedure arranged by police which is unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification.” State versus Traylor. Eyewitness misidentification is the single biggest cause of inappropriate beliefs national, enjoying a part that close to seventy five percent of convictions are turn over through DNA examining. While eyewitness statement can be powerful proof before a assess or court, 30 years of powerful public technology analysis has confirmed that eyewitness recognition is often not reliable.
If Barbie does not die Ken can still be hit with a charge for disclosing the fact that he had aids. Ken would probably get hit with intentional transmission which is when you fail to inform your partner that you don't have aids. Theres is also a possibility that Ken wont get charged because the laws are still very blurry when it comes to the transmission of aids. What is Homicide? Homicide is murder but not all homicides are illegal some are considered justified homicide an example of justified homicide is when its done as an act of self defense.
In other crime types once the intent is created it is followed by the execution of the act. The intent and act is not misinterpreted. In contrast, due to the element of disguise in white-collar crime the intent is blurred and frequently can only be obtained by interpretation. (Stephen Rosoff, 2010) White-collar criminals can only be successful if the victim is ignorant and negligent. Key differences between white-collar crime and other types of crime is that white-collar crime generally requires the victim to comply in being victimized in contrast to murder, robbery, assault or rape.
This can also have a moral dilemma involved. It can be very stressful if there is only one person who thinks the defendant is innocent and everyone else thinks he or she is guilty. So the question is do you stay to what you feel or do you go along with everyone else. Last but not least there is the judge. The Judge is there to make sure the defense and the prosecution go by the book.