Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

Post by eru » Fri, Oct 30, 2020, 4:14 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #311

eru wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may sound a bit barbaric, but the family of the victim might be better off with a chunk of money than with the knowledge that the perpetrator is serving time. (However, if you look at the incentives and deterrence, inflicting inefficient punishment like sending someone to prison for a long time, might still make sense.)

> the family of the victim might be better off with a chunk of money than with the knowledge that the perpetrator is serving time. Justice isn't always about providing benefit to those harmed. It's also about providing a framework in which crime is avoided by all because they know there are repercussions they can't avoid. When the expectation is that you're rich and you can get away with killing someone either throug…

Post by Thorrez » Fri, Oct 30, 2020, 4:34 AM UTC

simonh wrote: post #281

Thorrez wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To commit a sin with the intention of attempting to obtain forgiveness through reconciliation afterward is itself a mortal sin. Source? If you do it with a mortal sin I can understand it would be a second mortal sin. But it seems harsh to make a venial sin into a mortal sin from this.

The venial sin isn't the problem, you're attempting to deceive God through manipulation. I would think anyway, not a Catholic.

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Oct 30, 2020, 6:17 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #324

eru wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, do compare wrongful death claims in the US which are handled in a civil suit. O.J. Simpson famously got off with 'not guilty' in the murder case, but lost the civil suit. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_death_claim and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_murder_case#Civi...

Yes, civil suits are brought be individuals, so are less about societal pressure and more about recompense, while criminal cases are brought by the state. I believe there's also a lower bar, and civil court works by "a preponderance of the evidence" as opposed to "beyond a reasonable doubt". The courts serve different purposes.

Post by eru » Fri, Oct 30, 2020, 8:31 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #326

dragonwriter wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, civil suits are brought be individuals, so are less about societal pressure and more about recompense, while criminal cases are brought by the state. This is somewhat inaccurate; while it is true that criminal cases can only be brought by the State, civil cases can be brought by the State or private parties.

Oh, good to know, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks! :)

Post by pnw_hazor » Fri, Oct 30, 2020, 7:23 PM UTC

jimz wrote: post #278

pnw_hazor wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The adversarial system used in US courts assumes the other side will discover such frauds and bring them to the attention of the court. I think the frauds that appear to be legal but do not actually involve courts are where more harm is. These are the scams asking people to pay fines or else.

And it does, of course, very frequently. The US Court system's problem is not a matter of discovering such frauds and wrongdoing, and in some fields it's almost impossible to get away with this sort of conduct, but overall, there's little avenues of redress. Civil litigation is obviously the biggest area and the best positioned to both catch and remedy the fraud. Some criminal proceedings have similar robust checks,…