Watch and write

1) watch and write

  • This legal requirement is critical, and it works directly with actus reas.
  • First read page 101, the section titled “Mens Rea.” Then watch the video posted this week that will give you a quick overview of mensrea.
  • Then answer the following questions:
  • What’s the definition of mens reas?
  • How does mens rea relate to actus rea? What must exist between the two (see page 122)? Why must they exist together

2) Watch and write

http://www.app.com/videos/news/local/ocean-county/…

  • Strict liability crimes eliminate the need for a particular mens rea. An example of a strict liability crime is statutory rape. If a person over 18 has sexual relations with a person under 18, it doesn’t matter that they didn’t know their partner was under 18. There is no “knowing” requirement, or even a reckless or negligent requirement. In fact, the defendant could prove that they checked the ID of the partner and it said they were 19 and it looked real. Maybe it was real, and the birthdate was wrong! Even that doesn’t negate the fact that they are guilty under the law. They don’t have to know the age of their partner. If they are under 18, then they are guilty of statutory rape.
  • Watch the video posted for this week about using strict liability to prosecute herion dealers. The law in their state takes away the “intent to kill” in prosecutions of drug dealers. If they deal herion, even if they don’t do it with the intent to kill, they can be prosecuted for 1st degree murder.
  • So let’s talk about these laws. Is it fair to prosecute a drug dealer for murder if all they did was sell the drugs and had no intent to kill?
  • What about statutory rape? Why have these laws been passed with strict liability? Find an example of a case in the news where a person was prosecuted and convicted of statutory rape? What was their sentence?

3) Respond to each student paragraph with at least 65 words in first person.

1) After watching the “Legally Blonde ” video I was able to define both Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita and figure out how these crimes are different from each other . Mala in Se has to do with crimes that violate the moral , public , or natural principals of society. When it comes to Mala Prohibita crimes they are more known as victimless crimes. Mala in Se crimes have to do with murder, rape , robbery and burglary. As in Mala Prohibita crimes have more to do with copyright , drug use , petty theft, and parking violations. Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita as you can tell are very different sets of crimes. Mala Prohibita crimes are wrong because they violate a law rather than being an action that harms or offends society . I believe that Mala Prohibita crime are less severe than Mala in Se crimes .

2) I agree with with Justice Douglas. Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly mention “privacy”, Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the majority that the right was to be found in the “penumbras” and “emanations” of other constitutional protections, such as the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment. Justice Arthur Goldberg wrote a concurring opinion in which he used the Ninth Amendment in support of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Justice Byron White and Justice John Marshall Harlan II wrote concurring opinions in which they argued that privacy is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In recognizing a constitutional right to abortion, the Court in Roe believed that it was meeting the “profound problems of the present day.” The “problems” which the Court thought would be ameliorated by its decision included the medical risks associated with pregnancy, a “distressful life and future” for the pregnant woman confronted with an unwanted pregnancy, “psychological harm,” the difficulty in providing “child care,” “the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child,” “the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically or otherwise, to care for it,” and, for some, “the additional difficulties and continuing stigma associated with unwed motherhood ”

3) This was kind of a difficult assignment to complete but, I think the court should use rational basis level scrutiny because even though Ms. Biocic’s claim was based on the fact that the ordinance prohibited the exposure of female breast and did not prohibit the exposer of male breast, it is not greatly related to an important governmental interest so it won’t be labeled under the category of intermediate level of scrutiny. The ordinance is based on the differences between the male and female body, so it is gender-based for equal protection purposes. The distinction here now is that it is related to a legitimate purpose, therefore it does not deny equal protection.

I would decide this case by using common sense because it is absolutely obvious that it is unlawful for any person to knowingly or voluntarily appear in a place that is open to the public or to public view, to be in a state of nudity. Just because her male friend did not mind or she was not able to spot anyone else around the area does not mean that she could do what she wishes.

4) Actus Reus as defined by the book means a criminal act, the physical or external component of a crime. In the video, Actus Reus was also described as an act that was voluntary. After reading the case of people v. Martino I feel that Martino should be charged with a sentence totaling to 180 days in jail and 4 years of probation. This is based off the evidence that we have present in this case. He should be charged with battery. Battery varies by jurisdiction but a typical definition is the intentional offensive or harmful touching of another person without their consent. Which in this case he did just that. The evidence we have here was A, when Martino pushed Keenon down the stairs and B, when police arrived and he was on top of Keenon and was choking her. This is direct contact, contact that was 100% intentional and voluntary. After doing some research on what physically happens to the human body when they are tased, I have come to the conclusion that tasers are designed for neuromuscular incapacitation. Meaning a person is temporarily unable to control their movements. Under Actus Reus, Martino cannot be charged for breaking Keenon’s arm but he can get charged for pushing her down the stairs and choking her. Although, he would have never broken her arm if he wasn’t assaulting her in the first place, but we cannot play the If game because there are too many if’s.

5) What I have read in regards to the case of Jerry Sandusky and interpreted, I would have to disagree with the entire Penn State football program for the failure of reporting the incidents that took place. If and only if every single individual had vital information and/or have witnessed any indecent act then, and only then, they may be accountable for there actions for having knowledge of the actions taken place. Official and higher tiered individuals that represent the school hold a greater sense of responsibility in terms of handling any sort of allegations made on other employees that involve any indecent act or intense allegations. For instance, Graduate Assistant Mike McQueary tells a fellow coach, Coach Paterno, that he had witnessed sexual abuse conducted by Sandusky but did not take the reasonable method of action by reporting it to local law enforcement and by stating he “told” Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz of the incident only for Shultz to then say he was never informed of such allegations causes a turmoil of possible biased assumptions of the case. Taken from the referred article, a plaintiff states “he would not have been assaulted by Sandusky if officials, who were aware he was molesting boys, had not covered up his misconduct.” This only intensifies the conspiracy behind obstruction of justice that was involved in the case. In conclusion, the penalty should not be placed on the entire Penn State program as it was indicated through the grand jury and evidence found throughout the timeline of accusations on Sandusky’s case that high ranking individuals had knowledge of the indecent conducts performed.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more
error: Content is protected !!