Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 28 to 36 of 38
Discuss A hypothetical criminal law case: Who has the right answer? at the Non Wrestling Talk within the Wrestling Talk Forums; Matclone- It appears we're on the same page! :-D...
  1. #28
    Round of 12 Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Matclone- It appears we're on the same page! :-D

  2. #29
    Big
    Big is offline
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    I've seen so many cases where a group of kids go into a convenience store to rob it and one pulls a gun and kills the clerk, yet all are charged with murder... so I'm curious what the difference would be?


    Maybe that is because they all discussed and agreed upon killing a clerk as a possibility. Say maybe they all put the money towards buying a gun and such.

  3. #30
    NCAA Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,406

    Default

    How do you know the guy holding the victim down didn't know the other guy intended to kill him?
    There's no such thing as a pretty good aligator wrestler.

  4. #31
    Big
    Big is offline
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FloggingSully View Post
    How do you know the guy holding the victim down didn't know the other guy intended to kill him?
    Because it doesn't say so in the hypothetical. One very important rule of law is NOT to assume outside of evidence.

  5. #32
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Okay, now that you all (or is it yo'l) have commissersated enough over this, how about a dose of factual reality. Trotsky would be tried for accessory to murder in the 2nd degree since they can't prove premeditated intent, assault (put the vic to the ground) and armed robbery. Lenin would be tried for murder 1, with intent and armed robbery. Since they could not prove Trotsky maintained a lethal intent, he would be offered a reduced term in return for testifying against Lenin. Trotsky would get offered 10-15 with parole in 7 with good behavior. He takes the deal before Lenin cops a plea. If he waits and Lenin pleas first, he won't get the same deal. Lenin, now seeing the death penalty in front of him, cops a plea of 25- life, he's out in 18. Nifong, the prosecutor, gets re-elected.

  6. #33
    Round of 12 Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Very well put! :-D

  7. #34
    Big
    Big is offline
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    Yeah, good analysis RYou. I am sure you just salivated over this particular hypothetical.

    It seems to me, the very fine detail that is at work here is the fact that Lenin had no reason to kill Nicholas (I know just like you would learn in American history classes). He was supposed to simply grab the tickets as they planned to do but instead Lenin decided to slit his throat.

    Say, Nicholas pulled his own knife first and then Lenin slit his throat. In this case, Trotsky would be liable for murder along with Lenin since it was foreseeable that Nicholas could resist with a deadly weapon.

  8. #35
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big View Post
    Because it doesn't say so in the hypothetical. One very important rule of law is NOT to assume outside of evidence.
    ...forever forward to be known as The Nifong Rule of Law

  9. #36
    Round of 12 Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Like I mentioned above, I work in the Public Defenders' Office in North Carolina. (Not in Durham Co.) However, most of the attorneys in our office actually feel like Nifong, outside of this incident, was a good DA. They always get a good laugh about this situation because they say this kind of stuff happens all the time throughout the state and I'm sure throughout the country. One of their favorite stories is about a DA, who withheld forensic evidence that proved a man wasn't a killer. All he got was a slap on the wrist, was told to step down as a DA- now owns his own practice and is still practicing.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

user tags

criminal law hypotheticals

criminal law hypotheticals and answers

hypothetical criminal cases

criminal law hypothetical

criminal law hyposmurder hypotheticalscriminal law homicide hypotheticalcriminal hypotheticalshomicide hypotheticalscriminal procedure hypotheticalscriminal law homicide hypotheticalsfelony murder hypotheticalhypothetical criminal law caseslaw phrases for hypothetical casehypothetical criminal casefelony murder hypotheticalscriminal law mens rea hypotheticalhypothetical murder casescrim law hyposfelony murder rule hypotheticalshomicide hyposcrim law hypotheticalcriminal hypothetical with answerspublic defender hypotheticalshypothetical criminal lawcriminal law hypothetical casesmens rea hypotheticalshypothetical murder casecriminal case hypotheticalhypothetical law casemurder hypotheticalcriminal law hypos homicidehypothetical legal situationscriminal hypotheticalCriminal Law hypos and answers

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •