Jodie and Mary were conjoined twins. On appeal, the Court of Appeal was asked to determine whetherit would be lawful for surgeons to operate on the pair to separate them.
Jodie and Mary were conjoined twins. On appeal, the Court of Appeal was asked to determine whether it would be lawful for surgeons to operate on the pair to separate them. The implications of separation were that M would certainly die within minutes and that J would most probably live. On the other hand, if the twins were not separated ultimately both would die within a matter of months. M's own heart and lungs were inadequate to sustain M's life. While joined to J, M survived only by relying on J's heart to pump the blood oxygenated by J through both twins' bodies. Sustaining both lives was imposing an excessive strain on J's heart. It was common ground that J's heart would fail within approximately 3-6 months. M's death would inevitably follow J's. On these facts, the Court of Appeal held that it would be lawful (though not required) for surgeons to carry out the operation. To the extent that any general proposition can be extracted from the decision, its gist seems to be that a defence of necessity can extend to lethal acts undertaken in order to negate a threat to life even where that threat is an innocent one. Hence, on the best view of the law after Re A, the story told of the petrified passenger during the sinking of the Herald of Free Enterprise, who had to be pushed off a ladder (and who apparently then drowned) in order that others may survive, may
What implications, if any, should a theory of justice have for the institution of the family?
What implications, if any, should a theory of justice have for the institution of the family? There is much debate between contemporary political theorists as to the significance of the family within the political sphere. Historically, the family has developed under a patriarchal model with the husband and father at the head of the household. Typically the man would be the main breadwinner whilst the wife would be confined to the domestic sphere. However, contemporary feminists, most significantly Susan Moller Okin, are now beginning to challenge traditional conceptions of familial structure and the relationships within it. Susan Moller Okin is a Rawlsian feminist. Both her main work on this topic, Justice, Gender and the Family, and several journal articles she has written, draw comparisons between her theories and those of Rawls. She describes Rawls as having "...very great potential..."1 and attempts to build upon his works to further her ideas as to the place of justice within the family. Rawls was one of the first political theorists of his era to admit the importance of the family by claiming in Political Liberalism that the nature of the family should automatically belong to the basic structure of society, along with "...the political constitution, the legally recognised forms of property and the organisation of the economy."2 However, Okin disagrees with Rawls on a
Two of the keystones of our right to a fair trial, the right to silence and the presumption of innocence, have been compromised in recent years; this compromise has however been necessary in the interests of justice.(TM) Discuss.
'Two of the keystones of our right to a fair trial, the right to silence and the presumption of innocence, have been compromised in recent years; this compromise has however been necessary in the interests of justice.' Discuss. Every person has the right to a fair trial both in civil and in criminal cases, and the effective protection of all human rights very much depends on the practical availability at all times of access to competent, independent and impartial courts of law which can, and will, administer justice fairly. Under Art.6 (2) of the European Convention on Human Rights, it states that 'everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty', therefore the burden is on the prosecution to prove the case. This means that it must prove both the required actus reus and the required mens rea. The prosecution may also have to disprove a defence, which the defendant raises as was confirmed in the case of Woolington1 where the judge at the trail told the jury that the prosecution had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant killed his wife. However, for certain defences, the reverse onus places the burden of proof on the defendant2. The second keystone of our right to a fair trial is the right to remain silent. Murphy (2005) notes that the right of silence has two aspects, the right not to be compelled to give evidence, and the
The Concept of Impossibility In Inchoate Offences.
THE CONCEPT OF IMPOSSIBILITY IN INCHOATE OFFENCES . The concept of impossibility occurs in all three inchoate offences; incitement, conspiracy and attempts. This concept entails the fact that in some circumstances the planned act which, if carried would result in an unlawful offence, sometimes becomes impossible, and no offence can be committed or is committed. This is well illustrated in Haughton v Smith (1975) AC 476, where the defendant was charged and convicted of attempting to handle stolen goods. Prior to this however, the police had already recovered the stolen goods but proceeded to catch the rest of the people involved, which resulted in the arrest of the defendant. The court held that at the time of the alleged offence the goods, being in the lawful custody of the police, ceased to be stolen goods as stated by section 24(3) of the Theft Act 1968.1 Inchoate offences are used where the full substantive offence does not occur. Of all the three inchoate offences, incitement has no statutory basis; it is governed by the common law. The actus reus of incitement requires proof that the accused by means of encouragement, persuasion, threats or pressure sought to influence another to commit an offence.2 Generally, incitement occurs between two people, however an incitement can be unilateral as seen in R v Most (1881) 7 QBD 244. Here the defendant had published an
offences against property
Criminal Law is an institutional designed to protect society against certain substantial harm by imposing sanctions on the offenders. In other words, it states what one ought to do or else they suffer. Inevitably one is arrested, tried and punished in case he is found guilty of breach of any criminal law. A crime is a legal wrong to the public consequence of which is that the offender if detected and it is decided to prosecute him, the prosecution is done by the state and if the offender is found guilty, he/she is liable to be punished. A crime is an act or omission that is punishable by the law. A crime is a public wrong. This is as defined by Smith & Hogan. Therefore every member of the public is supposed to bring a criminal for prosecution whether or not he/she has suffered a special harm over and above any other member of the public. Article 250 (4)1 provides that in the title of any criminal proceedings, the prosecution shall be designated by the word "Uganda". A criminal is a person who has committed such a legally forbidden act or omission. Purpose of Criminal Law . It forbids and prevents conduct that is unjustifiable and inexcusable and causes or threatens substantial harm to an individual or property i.e. force respect for life and property. 2. It subjects to public control persons whose conduct indicates they are inclined to committing crime. 3. it safeguards
The law does not prohibit a suspect from confessing to a crime. It does however provide that a suspect should be free to remain silent should he so choose and that he should be informed of his right to do so. Analyze with reference to relevant case la
Assignment Question: A person who is charged with a criminal offence enjoys certain rights. The principle right is that of the right to silence and the right not to incriminate yourself. The right to silence is an immunity, which differs in nature, origin, incidence and importance. The suspect's immunity was developed in order to avoid the risk of untrue confessions being obtained from a person in police custody. The law does not prohibit a suspect from confessing to a crime. It does however provide that a suspect should be free to remain silent should he so choose and that he should be informed of his right to do so. Analyze with reference to relevant case law. Answer: Introduction: When the police arrest a person, they should recite to him the Miranda warning. The Miranda warning or as also known as the Miranda rights mentions some of the rights that an arrested person enjoys. Such rights are the right to silence and the right to speak to an attorney. If these rights were not mentioned to the arrested person, then any of the confessions that he might have made may be excluded in their prosecution as evidence. We will look in this assignment at the Miranda rights and in particular looking at the right to silence and the right not to incriminate yourself. And we will look at some of the cases that are related to this topic. What is the right to silence? The right to
Offender Profiling...............USA or UK?
Aneeq Mushtaq Offender Profiling...............USA or UK? Offender profiling aims to present a composite description of a perpetrator, based on biographical and behavioural cues that can lead to the apprehension of that perpetrator. Profiling techniques have been used to narrow the focus of an investigation (by specifying the perpetrators location, sex or age) or to provide suggestions for interviewing suspects (McCann, 1992). As a result of collecting data and analysing evidence, the use of such techniques have led to arrests of serious criminals such as John Duffy (UK), who murdered his victims near railways (Canter 1989). This assignment will aim to compare and contrast the FBI's 'Crime Scene Analysis' of offender profiling with that of David Canter's 'Five Factor Model. The strengths and weaknesses of each approach will be highlighted including the main differences between profiling in the USA and UK. Due to the rapid increase of serial murders and rapes in the USA within the 1970's, the FBI invented the first systematic approach of offender profiling. Counteracting the rising numbers of serial murders lead to the development to the Behavioural Sciences Unit (BSU). BSU interviewed 36 convicted sexually orientated murderers and classified them into organised (average / above average intelligence, crime planned) or disorganised (low intelligence, messy crime scene,
CRJ 110 INDTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE FINAL EXAMINATION
CRJ 110 INDTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE FINAL EXAMINATION . a.) What are the central features of the police "working personality?" The central features are: Authoritarian, Cynical, Conservative, Dogmatic, Suspicious, Hostile, Individualistic, Insecure, Loyal, Efficient, Honorable, Secret, Prejudice. b.) How does the police working personality develop? The police working personality develops when the rookie is put with a veteran officer and is shown the policies in the real life settings. The office develops the traits of being inducted into socialization of other officers. 2. a.) Outline the structure of the federal court system? (1.) U.S. districts courts (2.) U.S. Courts of appeals and (3.) The U.S. Supreme Court b.) outline the structure of a "typical" state court system. (1.) A centralized court structure compassed of a clear hierarchy of trial and appellate courts. (2.) The consolidation of numerous lower-level courts with overlapping jurisdiction. (3.) Centralized state court authority which would be responsible for budgeting, financing, and managing all courts within a state. COURTS OF RESORT (SUPREME COURT) INTERMEDIATE APELLATE COURTS (39 OF 50 STATES) TRIAL COURTS OF GENERAL JURISDICTION (SUPERIRO COURTS, CIRCUIT COURTS, COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS) TRIAL COURTS OF
Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project "A Failing Justice System"
Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project "A Failing Justice System" By Oguzhan Atay 9/I Ms. Silvana Vazquez 29/04/2004 Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project In the year project, I really tried to do a good job, and for I am interested in this subject I enjoyed it very much. It wasn't a burden for me to research why people commit crimes. In my opinion, I was successful, because I did my best, and I used all the methods that I knew to gather information. Though it has lasted a long time to finish the project, I accomplished to complete it without great difficulty. As for the only obstacle, it was the weather. Untimely snow caused me to delay the project for a while. First of all, I decided to search the books in the "Suna Kiraç Library." Although I found the books in the program "card catalog", when I went to get the books, I was very disappointed. The reason for it was that the sources that card catalog show as books on criminology, in fact, was just fun publications on how detectives find evidence to find the guilty. I found only one very useful booklet, "Kriminoloji1" by Georges Picca. I started to read it, and it provided me to find the thesis very easily. Secondly, I searched my thesis on internet, but the sources were very useless. I didn't give up and continued until finding Crime & Society Research Association web address, because it helped very much to
Ambiguity and the Lexicon: Some Observations On Polysemy.
AMBIGUITY AND THE LEXICON: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON POLYSEMY Introduction Background information Recent development of artificial intelligence (AI) has push the discussion of polysemy onto the front stage \brought considerably much more attention to this formerly neglected phenomenon We believe that it is acceptable for a semantics to be based on the notion of word sense as used by traditional lexicography in constructing dictionaries. To put the matter another way, the inability of programs to cope with lexical ambiguity was a major reason for the failure of early computational linguistics tasks like machine translation. Yet it does follow from that failure that the lexical ambiguity distinguished by conventional dictionaries has any real significance for e.g. in the claim that a word such as play has eight senses that are then distinguished and described? The point can perhaps be put most clearly by considering the suggestion that there never was lexical ambiguity until dictionaries were written in roughly the form we now have them, and that lexical ambiguity is no more or less than a product of scholarship: a social product, in other words. Translation between languages, as well as more mundane understanding tasks has been going along for millenia before such scholarly products and therefore cannot require them. This suggestion would be very much to the taste of
