If one Siamese twin commits a murder while the other twin does all it can in it's power to prevent the murder what would happen in court? Would the guilty twin go free or would the innocent one be sentenced to jail?
2007-01-25 08:10:43 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The only punishment that could be given to the convicted twin, but not to the innocent twin would be a fine. You can't send the guilty one to prison without sending the innocent one also.
2007-01-25 08:29:01 · answer #1 · answered by Mutt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would think the courts would need to carve out an exception to the general rule.
However, I think they would look at several factors.
1. How much did the non-culpable twin (twin 2) know about the murder and did the twin try to take a substantial step in the prevention of the crime.
2. Did twin 2 act as an accessory after the fact once the crime was complete.
3. Did twin 2 make any attempt to notify the authorities after the fact.
You pose a very interesting question. Kudos to you.
2007-01-25 08:27:41 · answer #2 · answered by Peter 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm pretty certain there would be a guilty verdict since you've got an eyewitness only a couple of feet away. No intelligent judge would impose a standard sentence knowing it couldn't be enforced. I'm guessing they would court order looking into separating them. If that's not a possibility, I guess they would try to get creative with sentencing. Maybe sensory deprivation (blindfold, earplugs, handcuffs, etc.) during the day.
2007-01-25 08:25:48 · answer #3 · answered by Sam C 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the jury would find them guilty, since there would be an incredible amount of sympathy for both twins. The idea of being permanently attached to another human being is horrifying for most people, and so pity would trump justice.
2007-01-25 08:19:23 · answer #4 · answered by Jenn 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Assuming that they cannot be separated, then the innocent would have to suffer the penalty of the guilty. Since the innocent wasn't able to stop the guilty, it can be assumed that the guilty could again kill....and knowing that, he could not be allowed to go free...
2007-01-25 08:21:54 · answer #5 · answered by dashel_gabelli 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It would be hard for one to commit murder without the other knowing what was going on, so I imagine the one that didn't commit the crime gets charged as an accessory to murder.
2007-01-25 08:18:14 · answer #6 · answered by Got rice? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They chop them in half and send the guity half to jail?
EDIT-Side note....
How would one siamese twin pull off a murder without the other's cooperation anyway?
2007-01-25 08:14:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Are they separated or conjoined twins?
How do they tell the difference in them to know which twin was the murderer?
2007-01-25 08:21:30 · answer #8 · answered by vgordon_90 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the government would pay to have them surgically separated and have the guilty one die on the operation table. That way, they save on all the expenses to keep the villain in jail for years while waiting for a death sentence and processing appeal after appeal with tax payer's money.
2007-01-25 08:19:30 · answer #9 · answered by flywho 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How many angels fit on the head of a pin?
Nice try, but its like an ol' comedian said, 'Uof Chicago philosophy student asks, "if this is a drink of water, why is it a drink of water?" and ends up dying of thirst.
Man, its just not right!
2007-01-25 08:18:21 · answer #10 · answered by peter s 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋