preview

Jones Vs United States Essay

Decent Essays

A common misconception about the American legal system is that if one does not do something, then that person cannot be held liable nor found guilty of any crime. The tendency to stay uninvolved can also be categorized as the bystander effect. When we see a crime being committed we are to believe that someone else will help the victim or try to stop the crime. This could be what leads our belief that if we just do nothing then we are free. Doing nothing is a choice and sometimes you can be punished if you choose to do nothing.

Jones v. United States dealt with the issue of whether or not there was a legal duty of care. The court stated that if there was a legal duty to care then a person could be found guilty for doing nothing. As stated in the opinion of the case there are four situations where doing nothing, or failure to act, could equate to a breach of legal duty. First, when there is a statute, which imposes a duty, second, when a person has a special relationship with another, third, when there is a contract in place that one person shall provide care, and fourth, when someone volunteers care for another and prevents others from caring for that person. With these four situations it is clear that one can be punished for simply doing nothing. …show more content…

The challenge in the Proctor case was whether or not the act of “keeping a place” was closely related enough to the evil that the statute was trying to prevent. In this situation the evil was selling alcoholic beverages. The Proctor court showed that the act in the statute needed to be closely related to the evil, which would narrow the scope on who could be punished. While this situation is extremely rare it does show that an act can be considered

Get Access