Your Assignment Will Be To Submit Your Answers To The Follow

Your assignment will be to submit your answers to the following five 5

Your assignment will be to submit your answers to the following five (5)

Your assignment will be to submit your answers to the following five questions. Please identify which answers are in response to which questions. Please use information from the readings and resources provided in the first three units of the course to support your responses.

Paper For Above instruction

Question 1: Legal Implications of Reporting Past Substance Use by an Athlete

The scenario involves Athlete A, who is considering reporting Athlete B to the police for previous illegal substance use. The legal implications revolve around the principles of criminal liability and the potential for obstruction of justice. Under criminal law, the act of reporting another individual’s misconduct is generally protected and not illegal unless done with malicious intent or in violation of confidentiality statutes. However, the intention behind Athlete A's report—aiming to intentionally cause another athlete to be disqualified—raises ethical and legal questions.

From a legal perspective, Athlete A's attempt to engineer a situation to disqualify Athlete B to secure a personal advantage could be analyzed under the doctrines of conspiracy or attempt, depending on jurisdiction. If Athlete A’s report is made with the sole purpose of cheating the competition, it may be viewed as an attempt to commit fraud or to obstruct the competition, which could be punishable under criminal statutes related to corruption or misconduct in sports. Furthermore, if Athlete A knowingly fabricates or exaggerates information to the authorities, they may face charges of perjury or obstruction of justice.

Will Athlete A be successful with this plan? Unlikely, as the law generally does not support actions that involve dishonest or malicious intent aimed at unfairly disqualifying another competitor. Courts tend to scrutinize such motives, and if Athlete A’s report is proven to be a premeditated scheme rather than a genuine concern, criminal liability may be established for conspiracy or attempt crimes. Additionally, ethical considerations weigh heavily against such behavior, with sporting authorities also likely to impose sanctions.

Question 2: Undercover Operations and Legal Defenses in a Hitman Scenario

The scenario involves an undercover officer engaging a man in a bar to hire him for murder, which is a classic example of entrapment versus police conduct. Entrapment occurs when law enforcement induces someone to commit a crime they otherwise would not have committed, often raising constitutional concerns.

In this case, the officer’s approach—offering money and inducing the man to agree to murder—can be legally scrutinized. Generally, law enforcement has the authority to conduct sting operations, especially when they involve significant criminal activity like planned murder, which is considered a serious offense. However, if the officer's conduct was overly coercive or involved predisposing the suspect to commit the crime, questions about the legality of the operation may arise.

Regarding whether this is acceptable police work, it is often considered permissible if the police did not induce a defendant to commit a crime they were not already inclined to commit but merely provided an opportunity. Most jurisdictions accept sting operations targeting dangerous crimes, including murder plots.

The defendant’s possible defenses include lack of predisposition—arguing that they would not have committed the crime without the police’s inducement—which could constitute an entrapment defense. If they can demonstrate they were not predisposed to commit murder, the defense may succeed. Alternatively, challenges may also focus on improprieties in police conduct or violations of their constitutional rights.

Question 3: Demonstrating Mens Rea in the Case of a Friend Falling Off a Moving Car

John, who drives at 65 MPH with a friend hanging onto his roof, is charged with involuntary manslaughter after the friend falls and dies. To establish Mens Rea, or the mental state, the prosecution needs to prove that John’s conduct was reckless or criminally negligent.

Under the Model Penal Code (MPC), involuntary manslaughter often involves conduct that is grossly negligent or recklessly indifferent to human life. The prosecution will argue that John’s conduct—driving at highway speeds with a friend hanging onto his roof—demonstrates such a reckless disregard for the safety of others.

In particular, the prosecution must show that John was aware of and consciously disregarded the substantial risk that his actions posed, which aligns with MPC’s standard for criminal negligence or recklessness. Evidence such as prior warnings, the unusual nature of the stunt, and the obvious danger involved could support this claim. Ultimately, the prosecution aims to establish that John’s mental state at the time was one of recklessness, fulfilling the Mens Rea requirement for involuntary manslaughter.

Question 4: Core Felonies Against Persons and Property

Core felonies are serious crimes that involve significant harm or threat to individuals or property. For felonies against persons, the list often includes:

  • Murder
  • Assault
  • Robbery
  • Kidnapping
  • Rape

For felonies against property, common examples include:

  • Burglary
  • Theft (Larceny)
  • Arson
  • Vandalism

Question 5: Use and Importance of Discretion in Criminal Justice

Discretion plays a vital role throughout various stages of the criminal justice process, including law enforcement, prosecution, sentencing, and parole. Police officers exercise discretion when deciding whether to stop, search, or arrest individuals. Prosecutors use discretion in deciding whether to file charges and what charges to pursue. Judges exercise discretion when determining sentences.

Discretion is useful because it allows officers and officials to apply their expertise, judgment, and contextual understanding to complex situations, preventing rigid application of laws that may lead to unfair treatment or unnecessary hardship. For example, officers can consider the circumstances, such as the suspect's background or the context of the offense, to make more equitable decisions.

However, unchecked discretion can lead to inconsistencies, bias, or corruption. It can also undermine public confidence if leveraged improperly. Therefore, implementation of clear guidelines and oversight are essential to ensure that discretion enhances fairness rather than undermines it.

Overall, discretion is a necessary tool to adapt laws to individual circumstances, maintain flexibility, and uphold justice, provided it is exercised responsibly and transparently.

References

  • Dressler, J. (2014). Introduction to Criminal Justice. Cengage Learning.
  • Schmalleger, F. (2017). Criminology Today: An Integrative Introduction. Pearson.
  • Slobogin, C. (2016). Law and the Behavior of Lawmakers. University of Pennsylvania Press.
  • Robinson, M. B., & Darley, J. M. (1995). The Psychology of Judicial Decisions. Harvard Law Review, 108(7), 1487-1551.
  • Model Penal Code ( assembly of the American Law Institute, 1980).
  • Haas, M. (2012). Legal Aspects of Policing. Pearson.
  • Herring, J. (2018). Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford University Press.
  • Gottschalk, M., & Kraska, P. B. (2020). Police Discretion: An Ethical Perspective. Routledge.
  • Larrimore, T. (2014). Introduction to Criminal Justice. Pearson.
  • Feeley, M. M., & Simon, J. (2014). The Penal State in America. Critical Issues in Crime and Society.

Related Assignments