Black Hat or White Hat There are multiple examples of people convicted of major crimes working with law enforcement to help convict other people doing similar crimes. In fact, the perpetrator of the ZZZZ Best case was released from his sentence because of all the good he was perceived to have done against subsequent frauds. Is using convicted criminals to fight future crimes a good idea? Explain with an example. Disc7 Accounting Black Hat or White Hat Student Name: Institution Name: Abstract A criminal investigation involves seeking, collecting, and gathering evidence for a criminal case.
To sentence a defendant under the two and three strikes provision, he or she must be convicted of a felony offense. The crimes that qualify as strikes are such as rape, murder, robbery, crimes ending in great body injuries, burglary at residential homes, kidnap and forceful sex crimes. Opinions for Three-Strikes Law A person who is convicted of the current offense and has suffered one or more
A Crown Court also divides the offenses it deals with in three types. Class 1 offenses are the most serious offenses, such as murder, manslaughter and treason, class 2 are offenses, like rape, and class 3 are offenses, such as kidnapping, burglary, robbery and grievous bodily harm. Moreover, it must be noted that there are either-way offenses, which are dealt with as the name suggests, in other words either in a Magistrates Court, or a Crown Court, such as handling stolen goods and theft. In this case, the defendant can
Under the Fourteenth Amendment, it prohibits the execution of mentally retarded people. The issue at hand is the standard of decency to help mark the progress of society. This issue will help determine which punishments can be sentenced with out it being cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court of the U.S. affirmed that it is cruel and unusual punishment to impose the death sentence on a juvenile who has committed a crime under the age of 18 through the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment (Cornell, 2009).The reasoning for the rejection of the death penalty on juveniles is that can not be classified as being the worst of offenders. Juveniles are way too vulnerable to conduct in behavior that is too immature and irresponsible (Cornell, 2009).
Confessions can be a tough thing to get out of a person, or sometimes the investigators can be so tough on a person that it can cause a person to give a false confession. Confessions and false confessions are tough because the courts have to make sure you confessed and where not in any kind of way coerced into a false confession. Confessions grant the interviewer access to the defendant’s inner thoughts, beliefs, knowledge and thinking to why they may have committed the crime. An investigator can have all the evidence in the world against you, but getting you to confess is like putting icing on the cake. Confessions must go through five hurdles in order to be considered valid, these hurdles are: The voluntariness test, one part of this test focuses on the susceptibility of the suspect like the background and intelligence, mental and physical condition and prior experience with the law.
The juvenile court did make the decision to transfer his case, therefore; Stanford would be trialed as an adult under a state statute permitting such action as to offenders who are either charged with a class A felony, capital crime or anyone over the age of sixteen and charged with a felony. ( (Death Penalty in America,)Legal Studies 485, Spring 2003. Stanford was convicted of murder, first degree sodomy, first degree robbery, and receiving stolen property. He was sentenced to death and forty five years in prison. Stanford appealed this sentencing on the notion that his eight amendments protectipon against cruel and unusual punishment had been violated.
Were these summary or indictable offences? How did you know this? The charges against the two defendants in relation to the death of Matthews and Jackman’s bay infant twins are as follows; Kylie Maree Matthews: 2 counts of Murder 2 counts of failing to provide the necessities of life and Mark Ryan Jackman: 2 counts of Murder 2 counts of failing to provide the necessities of life As outlined in the Criminal Code (QLD) s 3 (3) an indictable offence, that is, an offence that can be prosecuted on indictment includes all crimes and misdemeanours. Although jurisdictions differ in the definitions of what an indictable offence is murder is classed as a major indictment and therefore covered by all states as an indictable offence. Summary offences are generally dealt with in the Magistrates court and of a lesser crime such as assault, battery, robbery etc 4. Who was present in the courtroom?
Defendant was gone when Locklear regained consciousness. Butler was convicted of first-degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon and was sentenced to death. Butler had an automatic right to appeal the conviction to the Supreme Court of California. Issues: To be convicted of larceny or robbery, must the defendant possess felonious intent to take the personal property of another person without believing, in good faith, that the defendant has a right or claim to the property? Rule: To be convicted of larceny or robbery, the defendant must possess felonious intent to take the personal property of another person without believing, in good faith, that the defendant has a right or claim to the property.
3. The burden of proof in a civil trial is where the plaintiff must prove that it was more likely than not for the defendant to be guilty based on evidence given by both parties. 4. The intent to steal is one of the essential elements of the crime of burglary. False -it is with the intent to commit a felony and in some states the intent to commit any crime.
The legal burden lies with the prosecution then the standard of proof required is beyond reasonable doubt. Also prosecution has the evidential burden to establish a prima facie case. Lak could be prosecuted for the breach of order under Section 1 (10). But if the defendant raises the evidential issue on defence of reasonable excuse then the legal burden was on the prosecution to prove that the defendant acted without reasonable excuse. The case Charles held “applying the test in Edwards and Hunt when the defendant had raised the evidence of reasonable excuse the legal burden of disproving rests with the