Clear Intent In Criminal Justice

When a person takes steps toward the commission of a crime and has a specific intent to commit the crime, but for unforeseen reasons is unable to complete the crime the person has committed the crime of Attempt (Jirard, 2009). In the case of the State of Indiana versus Donald J. Haines, emergency personnel including two police officers [Dennis and Hayworth] along with emergency medical technicians [Garvey and Robinson] responded to Mr. Haines’s apartment for a report of a possible suicide that just occurred. When officers Dennis and Hayworth arrived at Haines’s apartment they discovered him lying face down in a pool of blood. Officer Dennis noticed that both of Haines’s wrists were cut and were bleeding. When Haines heard the paramedics he stood up, and began screaming at Dennis that he has AIDS and that he should be left to die. Dennis advised Haines that he was there to help him, and Haines told Dennis that he wanted to fuck him so that he could give him AIDS. Haines than told Dennis that he was going to utilize his wounds to spray blood on him, and began to jerk back and forth causing his infected blood to get into Dennis’ mouth and eyes. Haines told Dennis that he could not deal with having AIDS, but that he was going to make him deal with it.

Following a fight with a friend outside a bar, Floyd Johnson, went to his house, got his .22 rifle and ten cartridges, went back to the bar, crawled under a pickup truck across the street and sat in wait for his friend. He later testified that he at first intended to shoot the friend to “pay him back” for the beating he received earlier.

As a general rule, crime involves combination of act and criminal intent. A crime is committed when it is acted upon with a criminal intent. An act of crime without a criminal intent is not a crime. Once an idea of a crime has been communicated and planned out it is considered a conspiracy. A conspiracy is a crime. The crime is justified due to

A person commits an offense if, with intent that a capital felony or murder be committed, he requests, commands, or attempts to induce another to engage in specific conduct that, under the circumstances surrounding his conduct as the actor reasonably believes them to be, would constitute the felony or make the other party its commission.

With a premeditated motive to commit such an act, the culprit, Montressor, thinks, constructs and orchestrates a presumed murder against

As previously stated the actus reus is the evil act, the most essential element, without the action there is no crime on the part of the accused. An intention to inflict harm is not criminal, it must be coupled with an action. Someone cannot be guilty of committing a crime unless it is a voluntary action. Once there is an indication that the action was not voluntary the defense has to prove that such actions where as such. A criminal act is physical movement, movement that can be seen by others. An act is considered voluntary when it is in some way the will of the person committing it. It can be voluntary even if it is a habit or is inadvertent (Worrall, 2013 p.94). If there was is an option to do differently, then the person is willfully engaging thus considering it voluntary. The actus reus requirement is satisfied either way.

Question 1: What is a conspiracy? What are the three forms that it can take?

Following directions is one of the most important skills in life. The ability to follow direction the way you are told and the way it is suppose to be done is a recipe for success. Following directions helps avoid preventable mistakes that may cause costly mistakes and as it pertains to law enforcement, someone’s life. Making sure you are paying attention to instruction is critical, and nowhere is this truer than in the workplace. Always follow steps carefully, know what you are supposed to do and when you are supposed to do it. In regards to law enforcement following directions is crucial to the safety of yourself and to others whether it be, firearms, officer survival, enforcing the law, or just contacting a citizen.

The criminal justice system was put into place for several reasons. There are four main goals of the criminal justice system that all work together to improve and maintain justice in society. The criminal justice system aims to protect society by preventing future crimes from happening and by keeping criminals from committing more crimes. Another goal of this system is to appropriately punish those who commit a crime after it’s been determined that a crime was committed. In addition to punishment, they aim to rehabilitate criminals so that they can be returned to society in a safe manner. Finally, the criminal justice system’s goal is also to support victims of crime so that they can return to the way they were before they were affected by

Consent is giving someone the expression that you understand what is going on and that it is approved by you. It could be from signing apple agremment when you want to update your phone to robing a bank with your freinds. And in many crims consent could be used as a defense becuase knnowing the riskess and the outcome you have aggred to do it without being forced. In talk of consent rape comes to my mind because that it the only thing seperating rape and sex. My experiance with rape cases only exend to law and order but consent can be used as a defense for the inccontly accused or for the real criminal. In one case three women tied a stripper to the bed and raped him. Later when he took them to court their defense was that he was able to perform

In a perfect world, there would be no such word as “crime”. Unfortunately, a perfect world is not one that exists, and may never exist. Crime can be generalized as any illegal activity that infringes upon another beings personal rights and/or property. However, there is immeasurable ambiguity in which the types of crime that occur are measured, as there are countless types of different crime. When policy makers are gathering statistics on the crime that occurs in order to create policy to systematically solve them, they often cannot be as efficient as they would like. The Government Accountability Office addressed the collection of crime data and statistics in their report upon “Actions Needed to Improve Clarity and Address Differences Across Federal Data Collection Efforts”, regarding sexual violence data

It is clear that there is no overlap between statutory conspiracy and common law conspiracy to corrupt public morals or outrage public decency as the two are mutually exclusive; common law conspiracy is confined to cases where the conduct corrupting or outraging would not amount to or involve the commission of an

Another element is Specific Intent, which is a mental purpose, target or intention to accomplishing a specific damage or result by acting outlaw. The term specific intent is commonly used in criminal and Tort Law to define a special state of mind that is mandatory, with a physical act, to constitute crimes or torts. Specific intent is usually means calculatedly or knowledgeably.

The five goals discussed in Chapter 14 in the book Criminal Procedure 3rd Edition, are retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation and restoration. First, retribution is received punishment in which the offender deserves for breaking the law based on how serious their crimes are. In a sense retribution is based on biblical references that states, “Eye for eye and tooth for tooth”. In other words, the Law associates retribution with retaliation in which they believe the individual deserves exactly what they brought upon others (Lippmann).Retribution falls on the assumption that everybody knows from right from wrong, but several people tend to act the way they want regardless if it was wrong or right. A good example is two individuals

If an individual is charged with murder, then he or she can be charged with conspiracy to commit a murder as well. An individual can be charged with conspiracy to commit the crime in addition to the crime itself (Inchoate Crimes, US Legal, para.3). Under modern statues it is required for the prosecutor to prove that those who entered into the agreement of the crime took any additional steps to further the completion of the crime called an overt act (Moore & Worrall, 2015, p. 112). The Mens Rea of conspiracy is the defendant must come to an agreement with one or more individuals to commit a crime and also must intend to complete the crime they planned. An example of this would be in the case of Direct Sales Co. v. United States, the defendant who was a drug manufacturer based in NY, was selling morphine to a small town doctor in quantities that would raise a red flag. The doctor apparently was selling the drugs illegally and the manufacturer knew of this, thus the prosecution was proving that he conspired with the doctor in having knowledge of the illegal sale of morphine (Direct Sales Co. v. United States, 1942,