Abstract The paper begins with an overview of how criminalliability is measured in terms of the degrees and principles surrounding liability. The crux of the paper, however, concentrates on aspects of the legal framework that provide defenses to criminalliability. This analysis is then supported with a theoretical framework and findings from the literature that are used to provide thorough analyses related to defenses to criminalliability.
Outline:
Introduction
Legal Framework of CriminalLiability Strict Liability and the Defense
Justification of Criminal Conduct
CriminalLiability Defense
Conclusion
From the Paper "The criminal liability relationship highlighted within the paper and later presented with examples for defenses to criminal liability is affected by differences related to types of crimes; such as, criminal conduct and true crimes. That is, the degree of liability within the former does not require all of the principles to be upheld while with the latter it is necessary that the corpus delicti rule holds. As such the measures of criminal liability are different across categories and may not be easily quantified in the relationship outlined in the equation specified throughout the paper. An example of the former is a burglary while of the latter its homicide, the difference within these two crimes is a clear indication of why criminal liability is not a trivial issue and why it is not always a direct relationship and how defenses can be formulated within the legal context (Schellenger & Wittmer, 2003, p. 1).
In the general scenario, the degree of liability can be easily established via culpability, capacity, and responsibility along with the five principles highlighted, however the logical structure of criminal liability is not as simple as the formula above highlights but has different scenarios and principles that will affect how the law is quantified or how the degree of criminal liability is measured."
Abstract This paper analyzes and examines the various issues related to corporate criminalliability. Executives and managers may be criminally prosecuted as individuals for the actions of their businesses, even if they neither knew about nor had any role in the crime. Thus, executives and managers may be sentenced to jail time simply for company violations that occurred on their watch. This paper discusses some of the applicable case law and statutes with examples from real life cases and then outlines how executives and managers may avoid or minimize their risk of criminalliability. It concludes with recommendations for improving corporate ethics.
From the Paper "Criminal prosecution of executives and managers for the actions of their businesses sharply increased during the 1960s and again in the 1980s after the junk bond and Savings and Loan scandals erupted. Various factors contributed to the rise in criminal prosecution of executives and managers for the actions of corporations. First, prosecutors became much more willing to take action against individual managers for criminal offenses by their businesses. Second, both Congress and the states incorporated criminal penalties for responsible individuals into an increasing number of regulatory statutes. Third, courts became more willing to interpret these statutes as public welfare legislation and to hold businesses and their executives and managers strictly liable for the consequences of a violation."
Abstract This paper discusses the philosophies of subjectivism and objectivism as they apply to criminalliability. It begins by defining each philosophy. It then presents examples of past cases and discusses how subjectivism or objectivism applies to them. The paper also looks at the history of British common law and how subjectivism and objectivism came into play in determining guilt or innocence.
From the Paper "The objective standard is now changing to the subjective. In the case of B. v. the Director of Public Prosecutions (2000) 1 All ER 833, is a recent example of the shift. In B. the defendant is 15 year old boy accused of incitement of a child under 14 to gross indecency. The young man was sitting on a bus next to a 13 year old girl, he repeatedly requested that she perform sexual acts with him, and she refused all of his advances. The original intent of the legislation would make this a strict liability crime, where the mere commission of the offense would incur criminal liability, actus reus. Using the previous standard for specific intent crimes established in Morgan, a reasonable standard would be applied to determine criminal liability of the boy. With the decision in B. the court now has established an objective standard. Lord Steyn in his opinion stated, "There has been a general shift in from objectivism to subjectivism in the branch of the law."
Abstract This paper offers definitions of both objectivism and subjectivism. The paper examines the highly controversial Caldwell case of the early 1980s that can be seen as a prime example of what pulls the British judiciary in competing directions. The paper also looks at the legal concept of "impossible attempts" and its relationship to both subjectivism and objectivism. The paper then shows how the area of the criminal law dealing with physical assault and battery is a good example of how subjectivism and objectivism continue to grapple over legal terrain. The paper concludes that neither approach is entirely without shortcomings, but each approach is certain to gain ascendancy at different times in the future.
From the Paper "It is generally true that drawing a distinction between the "subjective" and the "objective" is not a particularly easy matter. For example, if the law courts attempt to justify an ascription of recklessness by arguing that someone did not notice an "obvious" risk chiefly because they did not care about that risk and what it might mean for others - a "subjective" position British courts have taken in the past - then they are obviously applying some kind of normative (objective) standard to the matter. Of course, the confusion about what is really subjectivism and what is really objectivism cries out for a definition of both. To wit, subjectivism - broadly stated - believes that "action-ascriptions" which generate criminal liability should be determined solely by looking at what the individual's intentions and beliefs were at the time of the offense. On the other hand, the objectivist camp believes that someone's actual intentions are irrelevant to whether or not they are criminally liable: instead, proponents of objectivism cleave to the view that what actually occurred trumps any intentions or non-intentions the perpetrator might have had."
Abstract This paper relates that criminalliability is the idea that elements of a crime need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and should be proven to have been committed by the defendant. The paper also relates that strict liability assigns some minimum level of social behavior and conformity to the actions of individuals; hence, it does not require the principle of mens rea to hold. Next, the paper reports that justification of criminal conductrefers to any act that would ordinarily be considered a crime but is negated by the fact the action was used to mitigate some aspect of criminal activity.
Table of Contents:
CriminalLiability Strict Liability Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Justification of Criminal Conduct
From the Paper "Self-defense as a justification for criminal conduct is not uncommon and simply refers to actions taken by an individual to prevent another individual from inflicting harm. For example, if a burglar enters an individual's premises and during a struggle gets killed, this can be classified as self-defense. However, choosing to not walk away from a challenge and killing or hurting an individual who attacked, may not be self defense.
"The defense of others is similar to the self-defense scenario above except the act of defense is done by another party."
Abstract This paper describes mens rea as an example of an objective principle that is logically relevant in many criminal issues. It describes why mens rea is a necessary requirement for criminal intent in the criminal justice system. It also presents the argument for eliminating mens rea from criminal justice. The paper concludes that the preferable solution would be to restore mens rea to certain types of criminal conduct, as a relevant issue in some cases, but not a universally necessary component of criminal culpability in all cases.
From the Paper "One need only consider the misapplication of the distinction between ordinary negligence and criminal negligence to illustrate the potential for inequity where fundamental logical principles like Mens Rea are ignored in all situations, by inflexible rule. A few times every year, the news media broadcast tragic results of negligence: absent-minded but loving parents back the family SUV over a toddler or a caretaker accidentally leaves a baby in a locked car, or even pulls out of a supermarket parking lot with an infant strapped to a car seat on the roof. Under certain circumstances, the tragedy, although undoubtedly caused by negligence, does not constitute criminal behavior; in other circumstances, the same overt act crosses the line from mere negligence to criminality. Imagine eliminating the distinction between ordinary negligence and criminal negligence without regard to circumstances: parents prosecuted for criminally negligent homicide or manslaughter in every case where mistake or momentary inattention took the life of a child; or parents never being held criminally responsible, even after the identical loss of a second or third child because it was accidental. All three times."
This paper is a formal memorandum of law about the potential criminal, tort and contract claims by client Paula Tall, who was said to be raped by a famous athlete and then fired by him and the resort.
Abstract This paper is written by the author as the associate reporting his or her legal research to the senior partners about the client Paula Tall, a licensed physical therapist at physical rehabilitation resort, who was assigned to do therapeutic work with a famous athlete. The author reports that, after two days of therapy, the athlete offered Ms. Tall a contract for a job as his personal therapist, which she accepted. The paper continues to relate the facts of an inconsistent report of rape and her subsequent firings. The author presents questions and answers to (1) what crimes, if any, might the famous athlete be charged with and the prospects for conviction, (2) what actions in tort might be brought against him and the prospects for recovery and (3) whether the "contract" which he gave to Ms. Tall is enforceable and to what extent. The paper includes an extensive discussion of cases relating to the author's research.
From the Paper "There is no requirement that the victim of a sexual assault resist. The Texas statute defining criminal sexual assault focuses the fact that the victim is compelled, not her resistance. Hernandez v. State, 804 S.W.2d 168 (Tex. App. 1991). Further, consent must be given freely. If consent was produced by a threat against the victim, consent is negated, and the resulting act remains a criminal sexual assault. Cavazos v. State, 668 S.W.2d 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). Further, in evaluating the validity of consent, the relative strength of the parties can be considered."
Abstract The paper states that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB ) Financial Accounting Standards Board report entitled "Selected Issues Relating to Assets and Liabilities with Uncertainties" was based on a joint 2004 project between FASB and IASB with the purpose of improving the organization's conceptual framework and concerns the ethical obligations of the accountant's reporting requirements. The paper notes that the areas the report seeks to improve focuses on establishing objectives for better financial reporting by creating qualitative characteristics to be used when conducting financial reporting. The paper comments that the main area of interest in the report is assets and liabilities, primarily the role of probability and uncertainty in defining, recognizing and measuring assets and liabilities. Thus the paper highlights that the goal of the report is to establish an objective framework to be used when reporting on the financial issue of probability and uncertainty and its role in measuring assets and liabilities.
From the Paper "According to the current conceptual frameworks, uncertainty is acknowledged as part of the proper definitions of both assets and liabilities. However, neither of the organization's frameworks impose a necessary "threshold level of probability or expectation of cash inflows or outflows in order for an item to satisfy the definition of an asset or liability." Further, the current IASB framework does include a probability threshold criterion as part of its recognition criteria, whereas no such criteria exist in the current FASB conceptual framework."
Abstract The evolution of product liability in terms of the law of negligence represents one of the more fascinating developments in tort law over the past two centuries. In the 21st century the issue of product liability is particularly prominent in the public consciousness with the increasing size and economic importance of the industrialized consumer economy. This essay focuses on the law of negligence with particular reference to the issue of product liability.
Abstract This paper provides an overview of all aspects of limited liability companies (LLC). With the exception of corporate entities, the LLC is the only form of legal entity that lets all of its owners off the hook for business debts and other legal liabilities, such as court judgments and legal settlements obtained against the business. This paper studies the legal and tax-structures of LLCs, such as membership, capital contributions and legal precedents and trends regarding LLC tax structure. They paper pays close attention to the similarities and differences between LLCs and partnership arrangements.
Members of LLCs
Legal Challenges of International LLCs
Legal Trends
Capital Contributions
From the Paper "In some states, professionals such as lawyers, doctors, veterinarians, architects, life insurance agents, and accountants are allowed to set up LLCs. These are designated Professional Limited Liability Companies (PLLCs) and have the same characteristics as regular LLCs. A domestic LLC is one that is formed in the state where the business is conducted. A foreign LLC is one that is formed in a state other than the one where the business is being conducted. A person would choose to form a foreign LLC because another state may have more business laws than the state where the business is being conducted."
Abstract The various legal systems, the various rules of liability, and the unfathomable number of possible economic outcomes make a brief analysis impossibly difficult. Nevertheless, with a few simplifications, it is possible to shed some light onto the general concepts that surround the issues. This is what this paper proposes to do.
Abstract This paper examines tort liability in six different cases involving XYZ Limited. Among other things, the paper explores the appropriateness of the initial XYZ response to various issues and it also explores the legal underpinnings upon which will be based future actions. Ultimately, it may be said that the paper explores the complexity of tort law as it exists in the United Kingdom.
From the Paper "Tort liability in English law is an extremely complicated matter. Because of this, the following paper will examine six cases involving tort law and attempt to determine the statues and or legal authorities that might guide a business decision in various situations where tort liability has been alleged. As will become apparent, organizations owe it to themselves to prepare as much as possible for possible suits as they are an inescapable part of doing business. In the first three cases to which we turn, both sides of the matter must be explored. From Bill's perspective, he was misled as to the vacation cottage he would occupy and he feels strongly that he should be recompensed for his inconvenience; in light of the inaccurate - possibly fraudulent - misrepresentation given to him by the now-insolvent travel company, his anger is perfectly understandable."
Through a study of Stanton E. Samenow's book 'Inside the Criminal Mind', this paper argues Samenow's approach to criminal behavior that the blame lies with the criminal, not society.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 4 sources, 2006, $ 44.95
Abstract This paper explores Stanton E. Samenow's book 'Inside the Criminal Mind' and outlines the general strength of his argument as well as the surprising parallel between his doctrine of personal accountability and traditional Christian ethics. The paper notes Dr. Samenow's disdain for sociological explanations for criminality and also records some of the views of David Powlison, a Christian scholar whose work shares some of the same general conceits as Dr. Samenow.
From the Paper "One of the great mysteries of criminal psychology over the generations has been what precisely it is that motivates seemingly intelligent and - on the surface, at least - well-balanced individuals to commit illegal acts. For many years, it has been thought that social factors created criminals - or at least a great many of them. However, since the 1990s, Stanton E. Samenow has argued publicly that social factors really have nothing at all to do with criminal behavior; rather, people do wrong because their peculiar world-view privileges wrong-doing. The following paper will review Samenow's theory and argue that his work offers a compelling justification for such a view. "
Abstract The paper proposes the perfect criminal justice system, one that focuses on networking and collaboration among policing agencies, communities, legal representatives and those accused of or prosecuted for criminal activity. The paper states that the perfect criminal justice system will also concentrate on rehabilitative measures for criminals incarcerated younger than age 40, as research suggests that individuals receiving counseling are less likely to become repeat offenders than those who are simply punished and then released. The paper concludes that the perfect system is not a system that focuses on hostility or punishment for non-malevolent crimes; rather one where communities actively collaborate with legal authorities to build better communities and social networks.
Outline:
Introduction
The System Theory
Reform and Community Collaboration in the Perfect System
Conclusion
From the Paper "The perfect criminal justice system begins with theory. The theories underlying the perfect system should rely on positive reinforcement and authentic repentance and reform among criminals (Goold, 2004). This system is modeled somewhat after the idealized Japanese policy system, where the policeman encourages during the initial point of contact, or interrogation, the offender to fell "tearful relief" as like "a child when confession of wrongdoing to his parents results in a gentle laugh and warm hug" (Goold, 2004, p.14). Typically the American criminal justice system has focused on retaliation and retribution; this opposes the system introduced here, where policemen should focus on being known for warm, supportive yet just and effective care, not simple strictness (Johnson, 2003) which is more likely to lead to less reform and increasing crime."
Abstract This paper analyzes and evaluates the effectiveness of imprisonment in rehabilitating criminals. In Part II, theories underlying criminal punishment are discussed. Part III examines the history surrounding incapacitation. In Part IV, the effectiveness of incarceration in rehabilitating offenders is analyzed. Lastly, this paper concludes with recommendations for ways to improve how the criminal justice system handles punishment.
From the Paper "Crime is an issue of paramount importance, one that impacts each and every member of society on both a micro and a macro level. Over the past two decades, public concern has vastly increased over specific aspects of the crime problem, namely juvenile crime, prison reform, the role of television in producing violence, and urban gangs. Crime exacts more than financial costs; emotional costs are incurred when a criminal murders an individual's close friend, family member, or loved one or when an offender is incarcerated, depriving his or her family of emotional and financial support. Imprisonment is one of the oldest and most widely accepted responses to crime. However, while incapacitation is an effective mechanism for removing criminals from society, opponents argue that incarceration does not truly rehabilitate offenders."
