English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

is this correct
prosecution

2007-12-13 08:29:20 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

8 answers

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

2007-12-13 08:36:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Others have already answered your question adequately so the comment I'll give is on the answer YOU have given: it sounds as if you don't understand the difference between "prosecution" and "conviction".

A prosecution is only an accusation. To prosecute a person for treason is to accuse that person of treason before a court. To convict a person of treason, on the other hand, is what happens when a court adjudges that person guilty of that crime.

So unless you're suggesting that an accusation of treason is all it takes to convict of a person of it then "prosecution" and "conviction" are very different things.

2007-12-15 15:29:38 · answer #2 · answered by Able Tasman 2 · 0 0

Treason is the ONLY crime defined in the Constitution. It is defined as;

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

The reason is that in the past, in many countries, the crime of treason had been used to punish people who tried to overthrow a government - which, of course, the authors of the Constitution had just finished doing themselves.

They therefore strictly defined treason to require aid to a FOREIGN power - exempting what we'd now call 'dissidents' from being charged with Treason.

Richard

2007-12-13 08:39:35 · answer #3 · answered by rickinnocal 7 · 2 0

I don't understand your question, but the Constitution defines treason in Article III, Section 3, as correctly quoted by answerer dinodino. Nowhere else in the Constitution is treason defined.

2007-12-13 08:43:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Just curious, what is an example of a treasonous act?

2007-12-13 08:37:45 · answer #5 · answered by misty b 2 · 0 0

Not really. Treason means any act with deliberate intent to subvert or undermine one's own government or populace for personal or foreogn interests. So basically the constitution requires that to be proven before one can be prosecuted.

2007-12-13 08:36:16 · answer #6 · answered by douglas l 5 · 0 2

no. Treasonous act

2007-12-13 08:32:31 · answer #7 · answered by wizjp 7 · 0 1

Somebody must bring up the case. He must have proof, witness and evidence.

2007-12-13 08:37:46 · answer #8 · answered by Orange_5775 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers