The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » A simple question (1 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
Withnail
View Profile
Special user
974 Posts

Profile of Withnail
Going for a UK based answer....

Arson, ie deliberate burning down of a property (can be your own)
Conspiracy to commit murder
Perverting the course of justice
Possession of firearms
Illegal discharge of firearm
Manslaughter (if not arguing for a guilty murder verdict)

I'd say they're looking at 15 years, out in 9 ...

Hmmm, I need to watch another episode of suits ...
Yet again that oaf has destroyed my day
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
Bob, here is my reasoning. The father divulged that he was going to assault the wife. The son agreed to particupate. There is the conspiracy, even though he planned on taking the assault in a direction the father did not intend. He had knowledge of the assault beforehand (accessory) and agreed to participate (conspiracy). The fact that he switched the bullet does not change the assault (although it now makes it a different and more serious class of assault).

The fact that the father was not aware of the son's plans mean that he is not guilty of accessory or conspiracy in relation to the actual shooting.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On May 28, 2015, Withnail wrote:
Going for a UK based answer....

Arson, ie deliberate burning down of a property (can be your own)
Conspiracy to commit murder
Perverting the course of justice
Possession of firearms
Illegal discharge of firearm
Manslaughter (if not arguing for a guilty murder verdict)

I'd say they're looking at 15 years, out in 9 ...

Hmmm, I need to watch another episode of suits ...


Again, the queston is based on common law, not the statutory laws of either the UK or the US. The definition of arson as the burning of the dwelling place of another comes directly from English common law.

Who conspired to commit murder? Did the father intend or plan to murder his wife?
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On May 28, 2015, TonyB2009 wrote:
Bob, here is my reasoning. The father divulged that he was going to assault the wife. The son agreed to particupate. There is the conspiracy, even though he planned on taking the assault in a direction the father did not intend. He had knowledge of the assault beforehand (accessory) and agreed to participate (conspiracy). The fact that he switched the bullet does not change the assault (although it now makes it a different and more serious class of assault).

The fact that the father was not aware of the son's plans mean that he is not guilty of accessory or conspiracy in relation to the actual shooting.


I think you'd agree with me that I'd probably do better defending the father than the son in this case. Smile

Keep in mind that there aren't absolute answers to many of the questions in the scenario. It's not about the destination. It's all about how you get there.
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
The son would be very difficult to defend I imagine. Keeping the father out of the electric chair would be easier. At the moment my poor brain is addled.

I believe that in the original scenario the gun was legally held. Just speculating here, but was the son entitled to legally hold the ammunition? Is there a charge there? Probably not in the USA.
saysold1
View Profile
Eternal Order
Recovering Cafe addict with only
10630 Posts

Profile of saysold1
Bob - thougt you would enjoy this article from today's NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/us/mys......top-news
Creator of The SvenPad Supreme(R) line of premium, made in the USA utility props. https://svenpads.com/
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
As a life long lover of Zydeco, I found that article fascinating. Thanks for letting me know about it. Maybe it would be a good topic for another thread?
saysold1
View Profile
Eternal Order
Recovering Cafe addict with only
10630 Posts

Profile of saysold1
I remember you mentioning your love for the zydeco music recently so I thought of you when I ran across this article. I know it's off topic but as as Tom Cruise said in Risky Business... Sometimes you gotta say what the .,. 😀

If you want to start a new topic feel free mastermindreader
Creator of The SvenPad Supreme(R) line of premium, made in the USA utility props. https://svenpads.com/
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
Bob, two days have passed. I think it is time to give us your thinking, as a lawyer, so that we can see how far we felt short.
stoneunhinged
View Profile
Inner circle
3079 Posts

Profile of stoneunhinged
Quote:
On May 28, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
Keep in mind that there aren't absolute answers to many of the questions in the scenario. It's not about the destination. It's all about how you get there.


Der Weg ist das Ziel?

I suppose that I might offend some of you, but my take on on lawyers and lawyering is this: it's sophistry, plain and simple.

It's a lot of fun thinking through such a scenario from a layman's perspective. But at the end of the day, most of us want something like "justice". And for that we have to go back to the philosophers of old. Or we don't. Because we don't really want to learn. Not most of us. But for those of us who do, I would ask this:
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Northrop Frye once said (roughly) that to answer a question is to ossify the thought behind it.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
Quote:
On Jun 2, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote:
It's a lot of fun thinking through such a scenario from a layman's perspective. But at the end of the day, most of us want something like "justice".

Leaving law aside in favour of justice, the son gets life (in the European sense) for murder, and the father gets a far lighter sentence for assault.

On that question of law vs justice, I want justice when I have been wronged, but law when I am less sure of my grounds!
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On Jun 2, 2015, stoneunhinged wrote:
Quote:
On May 28, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
Keep in mind that there aren't absolute answers to many of the questions in the scenario. It's not about the destination. It's all about how you get there.


Der Weg ist das Ziel?

I suppose that I might offend some of you, but my take on on lawyers and lawyering is this: it's sophistry, plain and simple...


Ja, der Weg is das Ziel.

As to discussions of law and lawyering being sophistry, the same could be said about philosophy and any philosophical discussion we have here. The Constitution itself is the product of legal thinking. I wouldn't call is sophistry.

Nor would I call legal argument sophistry if I was an innocent defendant facing time in prison, or a prosecutor, or anyone else trying to argue that a particular finding would represent "justice."

Why the need to put down an entire profession?

The funny thing is that no one seems to like lawyers until they really need one.

But I'm sorry that you found the topic to be an exercise in sophistry. The hypothetical covered a large part of the common law that all of us live under to one extent or another. And, as you can see, any scenario can produce a minefield of actual (not theoretical or sophist) issues. A good lawyers job is to help the client navigate his or her way through without getting blown up in the process.

The purpose of this thread wasn't to see if people could get the "right" answers. There are many answers on both sides of the issues presented in the hypothetical. The idea was to see if members could identify all of the legal issues raised. And, if you take all of the answers given, I'd say you identified most, if not all, of them.
Tom Cutts
View Profile
Staff
Northern CA
5853 Posts

Profile of Tom Cutts
I am surprised no one has brought up negligence on the part of the father in the matter of gun storage. More so if the son is a minor having left the gun in a manner which it could be tampered with.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On Jun 2, 2015, Tom Cutts wrote:
I am surprised no one has brought up negligence on the part of the father in the matter of gun storage. More so if the son is a minor having left the gun in a manner which it could be tampered with.


Good point, but I think it was at least alluded to when I mentioned that the age of the son would be a factor to consider. Continuing down that route, though, you could also argue that the father would have been guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1194 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
I think it's a pretty good mix of rhetoric and sophistry.

Like magic.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
But the effects on people are vastly different. A bad magician can leave you wanting your money back. A bad lawyer could end up leaving you in prison.

There is also quite a difference between law as practiced by ambulance chasers and legal scholarship.

For example, would you consider Learned Hand to be a sophist?
stoneunhinged
View Profile
Inner circle
3079 Posts

Profile of stoneunhinged
Quote:
On Jun 2, 2015, LobowolfXXX wrote:
I think it's a pretty good mix of rhetoric and sophistry.

Like magic.


Exactly. I said that I didn't mean to offend. I didn't. I myself have a lawyer. My sister is a lawyer. Some of my Café friends are lawyers.

Still, it's sophistry.
TonyB2009
View Profile
Inner circle
5006 Posts

Profile of TonyB2009
Quote:
On Jun 2, 2015, mastermindreader wrote:
The funny thing is that no one seems to like lawyers until they really need one.

My lawyer is one of my closest friends (and not because I get in trouble a lot!). I got good news today and she was the first person I thought to ring.

Having said that, my father told me he would not help me in college if I studied law!
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Like I said, no one likes lawyers until they need one.

And, Jeff, you seem to have a limited idea of what lawyering actually entails. Do you consider preparing wills and trusts, drafting deeds, writing contracts, public service law, constitutional law and legal scholarship to be sophistry?

I don't. My only intent here was to provide an active illustration of what it means to "think like a lawyer."

If you want to know what actually goes on in law school, this clip from the film "The Paper Chase" is completely accurate. In fact, I had a Civil Procedure professor who was exactly like Professor Kingsfield, who John Houseman portrays here:



Sophistry- I think not.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » A simple question (1 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.3 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL