Who goes to jail for the crime?
2007-02-14 09:01:19 · 27 answers · asked by Patrick the Carpathian, CaFO 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
If the police have DNA and neither will crack. With life sentences, the d.a. has to meet the burden of the system. For me there would be reasonable doubt if neither one cracks.
2007-02-14 09:05:28 · update #1
No, not my situation. Although they are two different people they have the same DNA sequences. And the court cannot ascertain who committed the crime.
Remember, they aren't cracking.
2007-02-14 09:07:53 · update #2
there is no other evidence than a partial DNA read. No finger prints, hair, shoeprints, or skin under the victims nails.
Thanks for the dumbass remark.
2007-02-14 09:11:09 · update #3
no statute of limitations on murder. Remember someone is dead...so the D.A. is under political pressure
2007-02-14 09:14:25 · update #4
some states do not use a grand jury to indict
2007-02-14 09:19:03 · update #5
This one is for David H. Their parents are wealthy, the mother is a Cancer researcher for Mayo Clinic and the father is lobbyist for a major pharmaceutical company with heavy ties to the U.S. Government
2007-02-14 09:26:29 · update #6
What a fantastic plot for a crime novel! Thanks. Got an ending?
2007-02-14 09:14:36 · answer #1 · answered by David H 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If thats all the evidence, you cant even make an arrest. But lets say there is a known motive, there is opportunity, and the DNA you mentioned was found on, say, the murder weapon itself. Then I think they would arrest the twin with the weaker alibi, and stronger motive. And dont even write an update that "oh they both have an alibi together and the motive was the same" because this what if is alreadyfar too unlikely, and it would just be splitting hairs
2007-02-14 09:53:34 · answer #2 · answered by Together 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
great question, I work in a maximum security prison in Canada and we have an identical twin (one) incarcerated for the abduction and sexual assault of a 5 year old girl. This inmate has an identical twin brother, there is one important thing I think you forgot is that they are human and one of the two gave themselves up as not to impicate the other. The fact of the matter is that the one brother knew both where the body was and the cause of death, the other did not after hours of interrogation by the police. So fact is there is always the human element.
2007-02-14 12:56:48 · answer #3 · answered by DA 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
DNA would give one away.
Even identical twins DNA varies. For a long time they couldn't tell apart but as the science imporved they have found enough of difference in identical twins.
When DNA started they need a gram now they are down to a cell.
DNA is much better than a finger print.
2007-02-14 09:26:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Innocent until proven guilty. So unless the investigators can find evidence that shows with twin committed the crime, neither will go to jail.
2007-02-14 09:04:26 · answer #5 · answered by Amanda C 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In essence, I think you are asking if there are two people and one is known to be guilty and the other completely innocent, yet there is proof that one of them must be responsible with no way of determining which, how will the law treat them.
Basically, in the United States one is innocent until proven guilty. It is not the responsibility of the accused to prove his/her innocence but that of the law to prove someone's guilt. Likely, the powers that be would hold off prosecuting either until more evidence became available or, if applicable, the statute of limitations was about to pass.
If they decided to prosecute, a defense lawyer for one would only have to prove that it was reasonable that the other could have done it to have his client acquitted.
One other point, if both were involved, one commited the crime and the other participated in someway, they both could be convicted of a lesser charge of conspiracy.
2007-02-14 09:09:22 · answer #6 · answered by Greg H 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
If there is no other evidence then I doubt either would go on the basis of eye witness testimony because there would be reasonable doubt as to which did it. If there are fingerprints you could tell because even identical twins have different fingerprints from each other.
2007-02-14 09:05:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not saying its excusable, but imagine u had 4 kids then perhaps ur wife told u she had an affair and none of the kids were urs and had blood tests to prove it?? Just an example just an example!!!!! In which case id throw her off the bridge. Dunno what happened to the wee dude but it must have been a pretty awfull argument and something was said that made him snap. And it takes a lot to make a man snap to that extent, my genuine THEORY (just a guess) is that hes found out the kids were another mans or something along those lines. Thats not evil that did that, it was a mental issue.
2016-05-23 23:24:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As identical twins do have the same DNA, fingerprints would be an effective method to determine who committed the crime, as they would not share the same fingerprints.
2007-02-14 10:17:50 · answer #9 · answered by peersignal 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually with Identical twins, their DNA would be so much the same that they wouldn't be able to tell who did it. They would have to find finger prints that place that twin at the scene of the crime and one of them may have motive for comiting the crime.
2007-02-14 09:05:29 · answer #10 · answered by Fluffington Cuddlebutts 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
One would go to jail when they find out who through fingerprints (their DNA would be identical) The other may be charged with withholding evidence if he know something of the crime.
2007-02-14 09:04:53 · answer #11 · answered by sticky 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋