4 ms·
Do we want this kind of law, as citizen? It’s self incrimination, but that’s not the main point. It shows we’re trying to guess what the moral person was think
by eastbound 2y ago
Do we want this kind of law, as citizen?
It’s self incrimination, but that’s not the main point. It shows we’re trying to guess what the moral person was thinking while doing the crime. Is this ok in the justice theory?
- andreareina 2y agoMany crimes do indeed hinge on the mental state of the person doing the deed. The alternative is absolute liability, where e.g. you could be guilty of purchasing stolen goods even if you thought they were legitimate; even if you specifically asked and told the goods weren't stolen.
- bostik 2y agoYes we do. The "code is law, and law is code" crowd fail to understand that reality is messy and context must be accounted for. To determine between wrong and illegal: intent matters.
- dwb 2y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
- techjamie 2y ago(In the US) Self incrimination is only protected in criminal contexts. In civil cases, you can be compelled to do, or say things that harm your own case, because in civil matters you are not being incriminated by definition.
- adgjlsfhk1 2y agothis isn't quite true. you can't be compelled in a civil case to provide evidence of you committing a crime. it's just that doing so will be really bad in the civil case since it allows the court to draw an "adverse inference" that whatever you aren't disclosing probably really sucks for your case.