Hot answers tagged

76

You are not reading a law book here and you should not interpret a driving test so literally. It's quite clear that the question implies you should follow all of their instructions regarding how to proceed through traffic. Sometimes those instructions do involve "breaking laws" such as driving on the wrong side of the road or proceeding through a traffic ...


76

Through the legal doctrine of "transferred intent", wherein if one intends to murder A, and undertake actions to kill A, but one's actions kill B, one has murdered B. Whatever crimes one would have committed, had one performed them on one's intended target, are considered committed against the individual one actually performed them on. Many crimes ...


76

Your question is the subject of longstanding and ongoing debate that has generated countless articles and books and dissertations, so you're probably not going to get a fully satisfactory answer here. But here's the short version: Different systems operate on different assumptions. Your question suggests you are not a retributivist, i.e., someone who view ...


60

Although abortion is legal in the US, not everyone is allowed to perform an abortion. In Washington, the law allows a physician to terminate a pregnancy, and recognizes a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. An abortion performed by anyone else is not legal, and performing an illegal abortion is a class C felony. There are "plan B" pills which are ...


59

I would just like to clarify, in addition to the other answers and what Dale M alluded to, one important detail: Unless you are carrying out the death penalty, no one under any circumstances is allowed to kill anyone else. What you are sometimes authorized to do, is to use deadly force. There is an important distinction between the two. When using deadly ...


50

In this specific scenario, not only is it not a crime, failure to do so is a breach of proper maritime protocols and could be illegal. A person manning a boat and sees a human in water in distress should immediately go to the rescue or recovery of the victim. This is commonly started by the crewman of the vessel who spots the body shouting "Man ...


50

It appears you want to go for a defense strategy based on a self-defense argument. This won't work in many jurisdictions, because self-defense usually doesn't apply when you intentionally caused a situation where you knew you would have to harm someone in self-defense. Similar case: Bob regularly mugs old women in the park by threatening them with a gun. ...


42

Under 10 USC 843(a), i.e. Article 43 of the UCMJ, A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war, with murder, rape or sexual assault, or rape or sexual assault of a child, maiming of a child, kidnapping of a child, or with any other offense punishable by death, may be tried and punished at any time without limitation. The ...


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 ...


35

To add a perspective from a different legal system: In Germany, this would fall under the notion of Eventualvorsatz (loosely translated, "recklessness"). Basically, whenever the criminal code requires intent ("Vorsatz" in German), a total lack of consideration for the consequences of an action can be counted as being equivalent to intent. ...


35

Applying the Model Penal Code, which is the law in most of the United States: By requesting that A kill B, you are guilty of soliciting murder. By reaching an agreement with A to pay to kill B, you are guilty of criminal conspiracy. Because A attempted to kill B, he is guilty of attempted murder. Because you solicited that attempt, you are an accomplice ...


32

Yes, a person can be charged with the murder of person or persons unknown The reason that police are really keen to identify the victim include (in no particular order): It will probably clear up a missing persons case; So they can inform the next-of-kin; Being able to place a named person who loved and was loved before a jury rather than nameless corpse ...


31

Using Florida as an example, this would be fine. Tampering with evidence requires the intent to destroy, alter, or conceal it to impair its usefulness. The intent here was the exact opposite- there is no mens rea here and no crime has been committed.


30

The simple answer to the question you asked is that they are not mutually exclusive. Self-defense and “castle doctrine” are defenses. A person can be charged and tried for murder, and one or both of those can be their defense. But shooting someone in self defense does not guarantee immunity from a charge or trial. In the first place, you need to show that it ...


28

united-states He'd be looking at ~6+ more years in prison in the second scenario In the United States, this would be attempted murder in both cases, though in the case of actual physical harm, the prosecutor could charge related offenses such as battery, which is "an intentional offensive or harmful touching of another person that is done without his or ...


23

In Germany, the situation is somewhat unique because (following a compromise reached in 1976 and a revision in 1995) abortion is illegal but the "offence is not considered fulfilled" if done by a physician within the first 12 weeks of the pregnancy on the request of the pregnant woman who has received counseling The case in question here violates most of ...


23

You may get more effective murderers that way I would frame the question from the perspective from the criminal. If they know they will be punished equally from attempted murder from actual murder, they will try harder to get the results they want. More if is this common knowledge. By rewarding incompetence, you may end with a incompetent murder instead of a ...


19

There is no statute of limitations on murder This is true of other serious crimes as well like sexual assault, war crimes, genocide etc. The person can be charged now, 10 years from now, 100 years from now. Assuming they are still alive, of course, you can’t charge dead people. As a practical matter, historical crimes are more difficult to prosecute due to ...


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 ...


17

Both scenarios have the same mens rea (intent to kill) and actus reus (firing the gun) so in england-and-wales they are both attempted murder - plus the potential for host of other off topic offences. The difference will come at sentencing if Bob is found guilty. The Sentencing Council's guidelines provide a sliding scale for judges depending on the... ......


16

According to California Penal Code Section 187 (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Penal Code section 197 and 198: Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases: When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, ...


16

According to Wikipedia's article Diplomatic Mission: Contrary to popular belief, most diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and – in those cases – are not sovereign territory of the represented state. Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions usually remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special ...


16

A charge of murder means that the government are accusing someone of intentionally and unlawfully killing someone else. A charge is an accusation, not a conviction. A conviction is when you are found guilty of a crime. You aren't a murderer until you've been convicted, since innocent until proven guilty is a principle of law. Self defence is a defence to ...


15

Based on what we were taught when I was an EMT in New York State, there would not be a problem. Seeing a body float by, you can't tell for certain that they are truly dead, so you would be perfectly justified in pulling them onboard/getting them to shore/rendering aid regardless of your level of training. Face up/face down would not apply because, ...


14

It is not as simple as the witness just making the assertion that they are the killer. They will be subject to grueling cross examination to break their story. If the victim was killed at a specific time, perhaps the prosecution can prove the witness was somewhere else at that time, and therefore lying. (No Opportunity) If the victim was killed with a ...


14

This could fall under the Felony Murder Rule which is a specific type of "transfer of intent" where if someone dies while you are committing (or even aiding in!) a felony you can be guilty of first-degree murder. Some restrictions apply, which depend on jurisdiction, but generally "terrorism" is going to get you every time in the US, and ...


14

This is controlled by state law (there is also a federal murder statutes but the federal government doesn't dictate defenses for state law). Here is Washington's. RCW 9A.16.020 says when use of force is lawful, and there are different "public officer" vs. "person" related provisions. Generally, public officers may use force (1) Whenever ...


12

This area of law is dependent on affirmative defenses that states may choose to provide. I found two law review articles that present the situations in Georgia and Indiana.1, 2 Georgia Georgia Code 16-3-23 provides a defense for the occupant in this situation. Epstein argues that this statute is somewhat ambiguous but it most likely even applies when the ...


12

Yes, you are responsible for the knock-on effects of your criminal actions, but there’s a line. For instance suppose you aimed to commit tax fraud by understating your company’s profits in the accounting system. Your limited partner sees those fake numbers, believes they are real, believes this means essential cancer treatments are unaffordable, and commits ...


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