119

Assuming U.S. Jurisdiction: In the case of The People vs. Hansel and Gretel Holzfaller: Ms. Gretel Holzfaller is charged with the following: 1 Count of Murder in the First Degree (Murder of Ms. Witch Hazel) 1 Count of Grand Larceny (Theft of precious metals and jewels from Ms. Hazel) 1 Count Petty Theft (Theft of Candy) 1 Count of Vandalism (Bite marks ...


45

In theory, such an action could be considered a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, specifically 18 USC 1030 (a)(2)(C): Whoever...intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains... information from any protected computer; Where the relevant "protected computer" definition is in the same ...


39

You don't specify a jurisdiction but taking the US as an example, yes you could be charged with 2nd Degree Murder - you intended to harm them but not specifically to kill them: A second situation that constitutes second-degree murder is where the perpetrator intends only to cause serious bodily harm but knows that death could result from the act. For ...


34

Everyone goes free. Each individual in the room is considered innocent until proven guilty. If the prosecution cannot prove that Bob was guilty of the murder then Bob is considered innocent. The same goes for each of the other 19. However if all 20 people were part of some other crime which led to the death of Jake then they might be found guilty under ...


28

No, abuse of power is not necessarily criminal Imagine a judge that is “heightist” - they always rule in favor of defendants who are taller than 175cm and always rule against those who are shorter irrespective of the merits of the case. This is clearly an abuse of power. It’s not illegal because “height” is not a category protected from discrimination (...


26

The police don't need to determine who specifically killed Jake, only who participated in the crime. If Bob and his six friends work together to kill Jake, then all seven of them are guilty of murder, even it was only Bob who actually killed Jake. For example, if two of Bob's friends hold Jake so he can't move, and the other four of Bob's friends distract ...


18

The exact charge depends on the jurisdiction. In Wisconsin, this would not be first-degree or second-degree intentional homicide, both of which include the language: Whoever causes the death of another human being with intent to kill that person or another... Since there was no intent to kill, this would not apply. (Whether the prosecutor believes that ...


18

The point is that an act need not be a crime for which the actor could be convicted in criminal court for it to qualify as an impeachable "high crime or misdemeanor." So, abuse of power isn't necessarily criminal of itself, but even a specific abuse of power that is not criminal may be impeachable, Alan Dershowitz's arguments to the contrary notwithstanding....


18

As IllusiveBrian pointed out, this would only be a criminal matter by really stretching the definition of computer fraud and abuse to its limits. But it might also be worth looking at the situation as a civil lawsuit. The user who accepted the terms of service and then violates them by creating a new account despite being forbidden from doing so according ...


18

In Germany children below the age of 14 like Hänsel and Gretel cannot be punished for any crime. The prosecution should bring the entire situation to the attention of the family courts, which might opt for congregate care. This would be for their welfare, not as a criminal punishment. If they were minors above the age of 14 or adults, they could try to ...


15

In the UK, the key here would be the presence of evidence to back up Gretel's claim of self-defence mitigation, in the sense that she was motivated by the need to prevent a serious crime from occurring against her and her brother. In the story, we learn that the Witch was planning to kill her brother “Get up, lazy bones; fetch water, and cook something ...


13

No, abuse of power is not necessarily criminal because abuse of power is a moral construct and something being criminal is a legalistic one. And that the law and morals are only loosely related to each other has been shown time and time again. However, a lot of specific types of "abuse of power" have been made illegal due to the fact that ideally law is ...


11

Crimes go unsolved all the time There are all sorts of points of failure between a crime being committed and the perpetrator being punished. The crime must be brought to the attention of law enforcement. Crimes that are never reported are never solved. Law enforcement must make a judgment call that a crime has or might have been committed. Many reports of "...


10

Since the Gebrüder Grimm had studied law, they would have been familiar with the terms Notwehr (Self-defence) and Nothilfe (defence of others). Since the witch was attempting to murder Gretel's brother Hänsel, II 20.9 §517 of the Prussian common law would have considered the method used as an appropriate means to prevent this murder by the young child. ...


6

The crime of trespass carries with it the "warning" requirement (alternatively, no warning is needed if you enter "with intent to vex or annoy the owner or occupant thereof, or to commit any unlawful act"). There is no expiration for the oral warning, though the warning method only applies to a "guest", defined as "any person entertained or to whom ...


5

We have a case State vs. Norman where a wife killed her husband while he was sleeping. At trial, she testified that the killing was self defense under battered wife syndrome, as it was provoked after years of physical and psychological abuse. But, the Court held that the wife was not entitled to self-defense as defendant was not in imminent fear of ...


5

High Crimes and Misdemeanors (the bigger category from which Abuse of Power was derived) was historically meant as a catch-all for any actions that could cause a peasant to believe that the monarchy was not morally/intellectually superior to the peasantry, and thus question the concept of Divine Right in early times, and the justification of the State and ...


5

Violating terms of a contract is not a criminal act. Criminal acts require violating a statute aka a law - but not just any law, the Criminal Code, which is one law book out of about twenty. The vast majority of law books talk about fire exits, wheelchair access, car registration fees, stuff like that. So to commit a crime, you must violate something ...


4

A prosecutor cannot make a change to a plea agreement after it is signed. That's why it has to be signed. If there is an error in it then it needs to be re-written and re-signed. No, your friend cannot get their conviction vacated over this. They can have it reversed and put back into pre-trial for a new determination (plea, trial, etc.). They need to ...


4

Here's what I had to do : After going through this harrowing phase, I thought I will post an update in case some one is in such a situation. The Northern Territory's Personal Violence Restraining Order act has a clause (section 21) which basically says if the applicant believes a third party knows the defendant's name then the applicant can request the ...


4

This is an example of an affirmative defense In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove each and every element of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Where the law provides an exception that amounts to if you do X you commit a crime unless Y, the defense has to prove (to a lower burden) that Y happened. An affirmative defense only kicks in if the ...


3

A warning is arguably often a form of threat (and visa versa). The words are close synonyms. A threat, however, is usually used only in connection with an action that has some sort of human (or at least, AI) agency, while a warning often made to alert someone to a mere natural consequence of an action with no human agency (e.g. a warning that an object is ...


3

There will be a local rule regarding what police have to do with a person in custody. Here are the rules for Seattle. The main relevant rule is that they must take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of the detainee. They must use seat belts, unless the vehicle does not have seat belts in the detainee area. Additionally, they are not to respond to routine ...


3

The case was heard by a jury, Sorokin was the presiding judge. He ruled on a defense motion for a judgment of acquittal, which is why the matter was not (yet) heard by an appeal court. The only public explanation at the moment is that After a careful review of the entire record in this case, including the parties’ substantial post-trial briefs, the ...


3

This is a Federal court decision There are no state courts involved. This was a ruling by the presiding judge of the original trial There is no appeal involved because the case wasn't final. This is a ruling on a Motion for Judgement of Acquittal Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure spells this out: After the government closes its ...


2

The Orderud Killings While this happened in Norway, I will relate it nonetheless, as the question does not specify a jurisdiction. To make a very long story short, the wife of a prominent diplomat, Anne Orderud Paust (herself occupying an important position in the Ministry of Defence), and her parents were killed on their farm in Sørumsand. Four people ...


2

There is no possibility of legally holding a country "to account" for an action. An individual could be legally tried for a crime (murder), and a country could via a political process be made to suffer the consequences if a leader performs some act (it need not be illegal). Germany, Iran and Russia have historically suffered certain consequences of actions ...


2

This sounds awfully similar to the case of Warren McCowan vs. Mark Morales & The City of Las Cruces, New Mexico, a/k/a Las Cruces Police Department (read by Uncivil Law) (D.C. No. 2:17-CV-00902-MLC-GJF) Reckless driving and endangering (or rather: actually harming) an apprehended, complying person is, according to this precidential 10th Circut case, a ...


2

Although you had another location in your mind, I'll cite German law. There are several kinds of "homicide" law paragraphs, divided by intent. If you didn't have any intent of harming, you have "Fahrlässige Tötung (§ 222 StGB)", which roughly translates to "Negligent homicide". XY mit Todesfolge (several §§) can apply to several other criminal acts, e. g. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible