Reference no: EM133876932
Assignment:
You are required to disagree with a colleague this week. Feel free to say "I take the position that . . . " to facilitate this.
Relate your Discussion Board post to the book reviews from Michelle Alexander and Heather MacDonald which are reproduced here and herefor convenience.
Please explain the differences between subjective fault, objective fault, and criminal liability without fault (p. 129). Should these kinds of criminal liability apply to different types of crimes or crimes committed in certain circumstances? Please explain.
Before you took this course, what did you think was involved in intent in criminal cases (described differently, what did you think a prosecutor had to prove in terms of proving the intent that goes with a crime?) Did you think it was this involved? Is this a good idea? Why? Would you do it differently? Imagine it differently?
What is the difference between general and specific intent (p. 131)? In plain language (not using the language in the book) what is the difference? Is general intent or specific intent likely to support the objectives of Michelle Alexander (small criminal justice systems) or Heather MacDonald (larger criminal justice systems)? Disagree with your colleagues and argue and support your argument with evidence.
Would Michelle Alexander fault the construction a new crime with a specific intent more than a crime with a general intent?
In Fleck (p. 131) what is the "procedural posture" or route that this case took up through the legal system. What levels of courts did this involve? What happened at each level?
What is the holding in Fleck?
What are the arguments for each side in Fleck?