Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Should court cases be judged on intent?

themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 8:55:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I can't seem to make an opinion or a poll. I think it may be my Internet sucking, but either way, what do you guys think?

In case you don't quite understand what I mean in the title, here is an example: If you have someone that went on to a site, and an advertisment for a child porn site came up that contained a picture of a naked child, due to the nature of the Internet, that picture was cached onto the persons hard drive and eventually arrested for harboring child porn, as the cached image is used as evidence against him, should the person be guilty of harboring child porn, even though they had no intent to do so?
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 9:11:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 8:55:54 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
I can't seem to make an opinion or a poll. I think it may be my Internet sucking, but either way, what do you guys think?

In case you don't quite understand what I mean in the title, here is an example: If you have someone that went on to a site, and an advertisment for a child porn site came up that contained a picture of a naked child, due to the nature of the Internet, that picture was cached onto the persons hard drive and eventually arrested for harboring child porn, as the cached image is used as evidence against him, should the person be guilty of harboring child porn, even though they had no intent to do so?

Absolutely not. He took no action. He is not trying to get child pornography. There would be no point in punishing him, or labeling him as a pedophile for the rest of his life.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 9:20:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 9:11:26 PM, Citrakayah wrote:

Absolutely not. He took no action. He is not trying to get child pornography. There would be no point in punishing him, or labeling him as a pedophile for the rest of his life.

I agree, however many child porn cases in Florida (if not other states) are just this.[1]

1.http://www.jgcrimlaw.com...
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 11:01:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 9:20:37 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
At 10/19/2013 9:11:26 PM, Citrakayah wrote:

Absolutely not. He took no action. He is not trying to get child pornography. There would be no point in punishing him, or labeling him as a pedophile for the rest of his life.

I agree, however many child porn cases in Florida (if not other states) are just this.[1]

1.http://www.jgcrimlaw.com...

The site argues that viewing child pornography should be legal. I disagree.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 11:04:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 11:01:23 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 10/19/2013 9:20:37 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
At 10/19/2013 9:11:26 PM, Citrakayah wrote:

Absolutely not. He took no action. He is not trying to get child pornography. There would be no point in punishing him, or labeling him as a pedophile for the rest of his life.

I agree, however many child porn cases in Florida (if not other states) are just this.[1]

1.http://www.jgcrimlaw.com...

The site argues that viewing child pornography should be legal. I disagree.

So you are disagreeing with an entire idea based off the beliefs of one person in once specific use of the idea?
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 11:13:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 11:04:11 AM, themohawkninja wrote:
At 10/20/2013 11:01:23 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 10/19/2013 9:20:37 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
At 10/19/2013 9:11:26 PM, Citrakayah wrote:

Absolutely not. He took no action. He is not trying to get child pornography. There would be no point in punishing him, or labeling him as a pedophile for the rest of his life.

I agree, however many child porn cases in Florida (if not other states) are just this.[1]

1.http://www.jgcrimlaw.com...

The site argues that viewing child pornography should be legal. I disagree.

So you are disagreeing with an entire idea based off the beliefs of one person in once specific use of the idea?

No. But if your argument is that people should not be charged with a crime for viewing child porn, I disagree. I would only agree if the person did not knowingly seek out child pornography.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 11:15:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 11:13:04 AM, Citrakayah wrote:

No. But if your argument is that people should not be charged with a crime for viewing child porn, I disagree. I would only agree if the person did not knowingly seek out child pornography.

The argument is that the person did not intentionally view it, as the Internet stores pictures on your HDD whether you like it or not in a system called "caching". I don't know the details, but it means that you can have illicit pictures on your hard drive without knowing it.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 11:20:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 8:55:54 PM, themohawkninja wrote:
I can't seem to make an opinion or a poll. I think it may be my Internet sucking, but either way, what do you guys think?

In case you don't quite understand what I mean in the title, here is an example: If you have someone that went on to a site, and an advertisment for a child porn site came up that contained a picture of a naked child, due to the nature of the Internet, that picture was cached onto the persons hard drive and eventually arrested for harboring child porn, as the cached image is used as evidence against him, should the person be guilty of harboring child porn, even though they had no intent to do so?

One of the most important of legal principles is the need for intent for a crime to be a crime. There are exceptions with crimes like involuntary manslaughter, but generally you have to be aware and intentionally doing something wrong. In Morissette v. US, the Federal Government tried to prosecute a man for taking and selling used and rusting bomb casings on the scrap metal market. Every indication was that the government had abandoned them, and the lower court convicted him because the judge told the jury (incorrectly) that intent was irrelevant. Eventually the case made its way to SCOTUS who affirmed that crime is "generally constituted only from concurrence of an evil-meaning mind with an evil-doing hand."

TLDR: no
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/23/2013 3:32:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Mens Rea was established for a reason. A criminal must be both physically and mentally guilty.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle