Hypothetical question. Two criminals are caught and found guilty of theft. Criminal A stole for himself, and criminal B stole for his hungry family. Should criminal B serve less time than criminal A?
2007-02-25 05:49:49 · 8 answers · asked by th_779 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Nope. The law doesn't give exception to the rule of theft. They both should serve the same amount of time. Remember that Justice is Blind. . . And theft is theft. Criminal B could get a job and support his family just as easily as anyone else. It is a choice. He chose to break the law, so he chooses to take the consequences from that choice.
2007-02-25 06:00:04 · answer #1 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely. This is why mandatory sentencing laws often result in unjust results. In Solem v. Helm, a S. Dakota man was sentenced to life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for uttering a false check for $100 (under the 3 strikes law). The US Supreme Court struck down the sentence as cruel and unusual punishment. Often when people cite unjust results that are a result of judicial discretion, all of the facts are not presented.
2007-02-25 14:00:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course. Intent is always considered and should always be considered in our legal system. Crime is essentially about morality. While both crimes are immoral, it is far more immoral to steal out of greed rather than need. Criminal B did not go about helping his family in the correct way, but he is less of a threat to society because he only steals when he needs food for his family. This is similar to a criminal getting a less severe sentence for murder in a crime of passion as opposed to a murderer who planned out his crime in advance.
2007-02-25 14:00:26 · answer #3 · answered by BJK85 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps, but the issue is complicated. Judges look at each person, crime, and circumstances of such differently. Each criminal case and the circumstances surrounding such is unique. Certainly, a judge would consider why a person stole in determining sentencing.
2007-02-25 13:57:36 · answer #4 · answered by William N 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they did the same crime, they should serve the same time. If one person beat someone up for making fun of your friend and another person beat someone up for fun and did the same amount of damage, they should both serve the same amount of time, because they both had the same intent-to hurt the person. Just like with this hypothetical case; they both intended to take something which didn't belong to them.
2007-02-25 13:58:16 · answer #5 · answered by bevmoonshine 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both should serve the same amount of time. By stealing they both deprived someone else of their hard-earned possessions. That's the real crime here, it has nothing to do with intent.
2007-02-25 13:53:47 · answer #6 · answered by x 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they should serve the same time, they both stole. they stole and their reasons should not be pulled into question. they stole and thats that
2007-02-25 14:01:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nope. b should do more time. theft; conspiracy : enhanced sentence for crime infurtharance of a gang
2007-02-25 13:55:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋