A leader when provoked, responded in the same way and got caught by the leadership and got suspended along with the person who provoked. Is it justifiable? If the provoker and the provoked are equal in commiting the crime , the above statement is wrong. This has contemporary relevance.
2007-05-26 18:52:42 · 4 answers · asked by kumudam 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think it would depend on the provocation.
2007-05-26 18:57:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In many jurisdictions conspriracy to commite a crime is the same as committing the crime.
In Christian thinking thinking about a sin is the same as doing the sin.
Provoking is a very general word, so I am not sure what you mean.
Inciting criminal behaviiour is a crime, and this law is often used against musicians and radio stations due to lyrics (eg Cop Killer) as well as magazine articles.
The issue is about degree of guilt. For example the C.S.I show has educated criminals about how not to leave clues at a crime scene. That is, because of the show, criminal activity as occured. Now, if the show was was a documentary called "How to commit crimes and get away with it" then the makers would go to jail.
Provoked and unprovoked assault are different crimes. That is, if I go up to someone call them an idiot and they punch me, the punish is less than if I went up to them and said, do you have the time.
2007-05-27 02:06:49 · answer #2 · answered by flingebunt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A crime is a crime, unless there is an affirmative defense for it. Provocation is not the same as being forced to do something.
A leader may also be punished more severely, if both are not fired for the infraction as they are supposed to set an example for others to follow.
In a scenario such as an employee threatening violence against a manager, and a manager reacting in kind, both are to blame as a company could be held liable if someone gets injured trying to break up the fight. In this scenario, a leader can be in trouble both ways. One, in respect if they do not react and they are attacked, and two, for their job security if they do.
Justifiable? Maybe to their sense of pride, but not enough for any type of affirmative defense.
2007-05-27 02:00:04 · answer #3 · answered by Michael 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, just because he was provoked does not give him the right to commit crime....
2007-05-27 02:01:00 · answer #4 · answered by gldngraham 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋