Which of the three defendants is entitled to the defense

Reference no: EM133364399

Who's entitled to the Mistake of Law Defense?

Defendant 1:

Mark is the head of a construction company in Europe. He learns that the price of a particular catalyst used to make reinforced concrete has recently plummeted in the United States, so he decides to fly to the United States to purchase $14,000 worth of the catalyst. Mark places the $14,000 in an envelope in his suitcase, on top of his clothes.

At JFK Airport in New York, the customs officer randomly searches Mark's luggage and discovers the notes in his suitcase. The customs officer informs Mark that it is illegal to take more than $10,000 into the United States and that he will be charged with an offense under the Customs Act. Mark tells the customs officer that he was honestly not aware of the law, but he is still charged with the offense of attempting to import in excess of $10,000 into the United States.

Defendant 2:

Mark is the head of a charity organization in Europe that purchases medical equipment for sick children's hospices. He learns that the price of several pieces of essential equipment in the United States has recently plummeted, so he decides to fly to the United States to purchase $14,000 worth of equipment and have it shipped back to Europe. Mark places the $14,000 in an envelope in his suitcase, on top of his clothes.

Defendant 3:

Mark is the head of a drug syndicate in Europe. He learns that the price of heroin in the United States has plummeted temporarily, that the sellers will only accept cash payments, and that the price will soon rise to its usual levels. Mark decides to fly to the United States to purchase $14,000 worth of heroin. Mark places $14,000 in an envelope in his suitcase, on top of his clothes.

Now, comprehensively answer the following questions in three to five paragraphs.

Which of the three defendants is entitled to the defense of ignorance of the law? Why? Support your answer with the information in this chapter regarding mens rea, ignorance and mistake generally, and the empirical evidence on moral, neutral, and immoral defendants.

Reference no: EM133364399

Questions Cloud

What types of investigation techniques did the fbi use : What types of investigation techniques did the FBI use and In your opinion, are the investigation techniques that the FBI used ethical? Please explain why

Why comminication while positioning a client is important : Why comminication while positioning a client is important? Explain why you beleive this communication is productive ib helping her achieve the required task.

How did you communicate the outcomes, evaluation results : How did you communicate the outcomes, evaluation results and recommendations to key stakeholders? How did you ensure compliance with the organisation's policy

Can the defendant use any affirmative defense : Can the Defendant use any affirmative defense? Why or why not? 2. Should the Defendant be charged with any crime? Why or why not? And if yes, what crime

Which of the three defendants is entitled to the defense : Which of the three defendants is entitled to the defense of ignorance of the law? Why? Support your answer with the information in this chapter regarding mens

Describe the specific situation : Describe the specific situation Express your concerns about the action Suggest other alternatives Consequences should be stated.

Provide specific examples. what do these new explanations : Provide specific examples. What do these new explanations provide that any single theory cannot?

What do you think would be some of the most challenging : what do you think would be some of the most challenging aspects of working drug interdiction on a major highway?

Discuss the role of the administrator and early childhood : Discuss the role of the administrator and the early childhood professional in creating an environment that ensures that children are kindergarten ready

User Account

All Pages