Podcasts about criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 27, 2025 38:51

Elements of a Crime: A crime generally has two components: the actus reus, the physical or external part, and the mens rea, the mental or internal feature. The actus reus generally includes a voluntary act that causes social harm. Causation links the voluntary act to the social harm. The requirement of a voluntary act is generally an implicit element of criminal statutes supported by common law. In exceptional cases, an omission (failure to act when there is a legal duty) can serve as the basis for criminal responsibility. A duty to act can arise from common law, statute, or contract. Most human acts are considered voluntary, with involuntary acts including reflexive actions, spasms, seizures, and movements during unconsciousness or sleep.Mens rea refers to criminal intent or a "guilty mind". It is the state of mind statutorily required to convict a defendant of a particular crime. The prosecution typically must prove mens rea beyond a reasonable doubt. The Model Penal Code (MPC) categorizes culpable mental states into four levels: purposely, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently.Concurrence (or contemporaneity) is the need to prove that the actus reus and mens rea occurred simultaneously, except in strict liability crimes. The single transaction principle allows a sequence of inevitably linked events to be viewed as one transaction, where mens rea formed at any point during the sequence can suffice.Classification of Crimes: Crimes can be classified in several ways, most commonly as felonies (punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year) and misdemeanors (lesser offenses usually punishable by a fine or incarceration for less than one year). Crimes are also categorized as inchoate offenses and strict liability offenses. At common law, there were nine major felonies and various misdemeanors.Inchoate Offenses: Inchoate offenses (attempt, solicitation, and conspiracy) involve steps taken toward committing another crime, even if the final harmful result does not occur. Attempt involves preparatory conduct that comes dangerously close to success (common law proximity test) or constitutes a substantial step strongly corroborative of criminal purpose (MPC substantial step test). Solicitation occurs when one intentionally entices another to commit a crime. Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act, coupled with an overt act in furtherance of the agreement. The Pinkerton doctrine can hold a conspirator liable for foreseeable crimes committed by co-conspirators. The merger doctrine often prevents conviction for both an attempt or solicitation and the completed offense, but conspiracy typically does not merge. Renunciation or withdrawal may be a defense to inchoate offenses in some jurisdictions.Specific Crimes: Homicide is the unlawful killing of a human being, categorized into murder, manslaughter, and sometimes criminally negligent homicide. Murder is typically defined as unlawful killing with malice aforethought. US law for murder varies by jurisdiction, often with degrees of murder (first, second, sometimes third) and different classifications in the Model Penal Code (purposely/knowingly, reckless, negligent). Property crimes include larceny, embezzlement, false pretenses, robbery, burglary, and arson, each involving different ways property rights are violated.Defenses to Criminal Liability: Defenses are broadly divided into justifications (admitting actus reus and mens rea but claiming the act was legally permissible) and excuses (conceding the act was wrongful but arguing the actor should not be held criminally responsible). Justification defenses include self-defense, defense of others, defense of property, necessity, and law enforcement privilege. Excuse defenses include insanity, intoxication, duress, entrapment, and mistake.The insanity defense concerns the defendant's state of mind, potentially negating mens rea, with various legal tests like the M'Naghten Rule, Durh

Criminal Law – Lecture Three: Defenses to Criminal Liability (Part 3 of 3) (Part 2)

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 26, 2025 21:03

A justification defense claims that the defendant's conduct was lawful under the circumstances, while an excuse defense concedes the wrongfulness of the act but argues the defendant should not be held criminally responsible. An example of justification is self-defense; an example of excuse is insanity.The core elements of self-defense include an actual and reasonable belief that the use of force was necessary to prevent the imminent use of unlawful force by another. Deadly force is permissible only when the defendant reasonably believes they are facing an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.The majority rule (and the Model Penal Code approach) does not require retreat before using deadly force unless the defendant knows they can avoid the threat with complete safety. The minority rule, or "stand your ground" rule, permits individuals to meet deadly force with deadly force, even if retreat is safely possible, as long as they are in a place where they have a legal right to be.The defense of necessity allows a defendant to commit a crime to avoid a greater imminent harm when no adequate legal alternative is available. Two key limitations are that the defense is generally not available if the defendant caused the situation and is typically not a defense to homicide.The M'Naghten Rule states that a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity if, due to a mental disease or defect, they did not know the nature and quality of their act, or if they did know it, they did not know it was wrong. The central focus of this test is the defendant's cognitive understanding of their actions and their wrongfulness.Voluntary intoxication, the result of the defendant's intentional consumption of intoxicants, may negate the specific intent required for certain crimes. Involuntary intoxication, which occurs through coercion, fraud, or mistake, is treated more like insanity and may be a defense to any crime if it negates the necessary mental state.Duress can be a valid defense if the defendant committed a crime under the threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury to themselves or others, the threat would overcome the will of a person of ordinary firmness, and there was no reasonable opportunity to escape. It is generally not a defense to homicide.The subjective test for entrapment focuses on the predisposition of the defendant to commit the crime. If the defendant was already inclined to commit the crime and the government merely provided an opportunity, the defense of entrapment will likely fail, regardless of the government's conduct.The general rule is that mistake of law is not a defense; ignorance of the law is no excuse. One recognized exception is when the defendant reasonably relied on an official interpretation of the law by a public official responsible for interpreting or enforcing that law (entrapment by estoppel).Due process guarantees fundamental fairness in the criminal process, which includes the right of a defendant to present a defense. This means defendants must have the opportunity to introduce evidence, challenge the prosecution's case, and have their defenses properly considered by the court and jury.

criminals deadly lecture voluntary defenses criminal law involuntary duress criminal liability model penal code

Criminal Law – Lecture Three: Defenses to Criminal Liability (Part 3 of 3)

criminals lecture defenses criminal law criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 25, 2025 14:49

This lecture provides a comprehensive overview of defenses to criminal liability, categorizing them into justifications, where the act is deemed lawful, and excuses, where responsibility is negated due to factors like incapacity or coercion. It explores specific justification defenses such as self-defense and necessity, and excuse defenses including insanity and duress, detailing their legal standards and variations. The lecture also examines procedural and constitutional limitations, like due process and double jeopardy, which influence the application and availability of these defenses in the legal system. Understanding these principles is crucial for analyzing criminal cases and appreciating the balance between state power and individual rights.

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

criminals dismissed criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 14, 2025 27:19

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

Criminal Law Lecture 2 of 5: The crucial elements of criminal liability, primarily causation and defenses

defense types criminals tests elements crucial necessity consent lecture defenses stand your ground criminal law causation duress criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 2, 2024 18:16

Criminal Law - Week 2 Lecture Main Themes: This lecture focuses on the crucial elements of criminal liability, primarily causation and defenses. It delves into the different types of defenses, categorizing them as justifications and excuses, and provides a detailed explanation of each, including relevant case law examples. Most Important Ideas and Facts: 1. Causation: Factual Causation: This establishes the basic link between the defendant's action and the harm. The 'but for' test is employed, asking whether the harm would have occurred "but for" the defendant's conduct. Example: "if an individual fires a gun and causes another person's death, factual causation is established because, but for the act of shooting, the death would not have occurred." Proximate (Legal) Causation: This goes beyond factual causation, assessing whether it's fair and just to hold the defendant liable. This involves considering foreseeability and intervening acts. Example: If a driver runs a red light causing a chain reaction resulting in a distant vehicle catching fire, "the chain of causation might be considered too remote for the original driver to be held criminally liable for that death." 2. Types of Defenses: Justifications: The act was technically unlawful but acceptable under the circumstances, focusing on the rightness of the act. Self-Defense: Using reasonable force to protect oneself from imminent harm. Defense of Others: Using reasonable force to protect another person facing a threat. Necessity: Breaking the law to prevent a greater harm, choosing the "lesser of two evils." Excuses: The act was unlawful, but the defendant should not be held fully accountable due to personal circumstances, focusing on the individual. Insanity: Mental illness preventing the understanding of the nature or wrongfulness of actions. Tests used include the M'Naghten Rule, Irresistible Impulse Test, and the Model Penal Code (MPC) Test. Duress: Being forced to commit a crime under immediate threat of harm. Consent: Victim's informed and voluntary agreement negating criminal liability in specific situations. Infancy: Individuals too young to understand consequences of their actions. 3. Key Concepts Within Defenses: Self-Defense and Defense of Others: Requires imminence of threat, proportionality of force used, and in some jurisdictions, a duty to retreat. Stand Your Ground laws offer an exception to the duty to retreat. Insanity Defense: Rarely successful and requires substantial evidence, often leading to commitment to a mental institution rather than release. Different tests, like the M'Naghten Rule and the Irresistible Impulse Test, are used to assess legal insanity. Duress, Necessity, and Consent: Duress involves immediate threat and lack of reasonable escape. Necessity involves choosing the lesser evil to prevent greater harm. Consent is valid only when informed, voluntary, and within the boundaries of the law. 4. Relevant Case Law Examples: People Vs. Goetz: Highlights the complexities of self-defense, especially concerning reasonableness and subjective fear. Durham Vs. U.S.: Introduced the Durham Rule, broadening the scope of the insanity defense by considering mental illness's role in the defendant's actions. State Vs. Toscano: Explores the limits of duress defense, focusing on the immediacy of the threat and the availability of alternatives. Conclusion: This lecture emphasizes the interplay between establishing criminal liability through causation and the application of various defenses to potentially negate that liability. It provides a comprehensive overview of the types of defenses, their requirements, and limitations, illustrated with key case law examples. The lecture successfully highlights the complexities and nuances inherent in criminal law, balancing accountability with fairness and justice. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Killing in Self Defense: The Legal Complexities of Abuse-Related Crimes and the Impact of Intimate Partner Violence on Women's Criminal Convictions

Stanford Legal

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 10, 2024 29:59

How are victims of intimate partner violence meant to protect themselves—and, often, their children—without winding up dead, in hospital, or prison? It's a situation that many find themselves in. Approximately 15 percent of women in the United States are victims of intimate partner violence, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. But the legal system is not set up to help them. In this episode the executive director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Debbie Mukamal, and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes join Pam and Rich to discuss the Center's new study “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence,” that offers groundbreaking data and personal stories from women currently in prison because of intimate partner violence. They also touch on the systemic failures in the justice system in handling these complex cases. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Debbie Mukamal >>> Stanford Law School PageFatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introductions and Goals of the Research Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss how the project on women incarcerated for killing their abusers began during the pandemic, sparked by a lack of national data on these cases with Debbie Mukamal and SLS student Jacqueline Lewittes. Mukamal explains how her team's long-standing relationships with the California Department of Corrections facilitated their research access despite COVID-19 restrictions.(00:04:12) Chapter 2: Research Design and Challenges The team outlines the complexities of designing the study, including broadening the focus beyond intimate partner killings and overcoming barriers like accessing reliable court records. They explain how they relied on direct interviews and used validated tools like the Danger Assessment and Composite Abuse Scale to assess the severity of abuse.(00:08:42) Chapter 3: Striking Findings and Legal Implications Explore key findings, including the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries among respondents and the failure of self-defense laws to protect abused women. Jacqueline highlights a specific case that illustrates how memory loss due to abuse complicates self-defense claims, underscoring the systemic legal failures.(00:18:30) Chapter 4: The Role of Intimate Partner Violence in Homicide CasesThe group delves into the startling statistics of women convicted of homicide in connection to intimate partner violence. Debbie Mukamal discusses how nearly 74% of women in their study had experienced abuse at the time of the offense, breaking down the subcategories of cases, from those who killed their abuser to others involving child fatalities.(00:21:25) Chapter 5: Systemic Failures in Protecting Abuse VictimsExamine the various ways in which the legal system fails to protect women who are victims of abuse. From denied protective orders to mistreatment by police and ineffective legal defense, the discussion highlights the failures at multiple levels and the resulting harsh sentences.(00:23:55) Chapter 6: Law Reform and the Impact of Trauma on Legal CulpabilityThis segment focuses on potential legal reforms, including changes to homicide statutes and the need for better understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in abuse survivors. Debbie Mukamal and Pam Karlan discuss the implications of TBI on a woman's ability to recall facts, and how reforms could better account for their experiences.

Introduction to Mens Rea: Criminal Liability

united states criminals mens cunningham theoretical mens rea criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 25, 2024 27:05

Mens rea refers to the mental state of a defendant during the commission of a crime and is central to determining criminal liability. It helps differentiate between various levels of culpability, such as intent, knowledge, recklessness, and negligence. These mental states form a hierarchy that plays a key role in distinguishing between crimes like specific intent crimes (e.g., first-degree murder), general intent crimes (e.g., battery), and strict liability offenses (e.g., statutory rape). Key legal cases, such as Regina v. Cunningham, R v. G, and United States v. Jewell, have shaped the understanding of these mental states, while mens rea also impacts criminal defenses, including mistake of fact, intoxication, and insanity. It further influences the grading of crimes, especially in offenses like homicide and theft, where the intent can differentiate between degrees of the crime. The Model Penal Code (MPC) standardizes mens rea, offering clear categories that enhance legal analysis. Theoretical and practical implications of mens rea affect plea negotiations, sentencing, and defense strategies, making it a cornerstone of criminal law education and practice. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

AGAIN…Trump STEPS INTO Criminal Liability with Remarks

Legal AF by MeidasTouch

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 18, 2024 23:37

Have Trump and Vance crossed the line into Federal Hate Crimes by using their campaign rhetoric to violently target the legal Haitian community in Springfield Ohio? Michael Popok examines and recommends that the DOJ warn the Proud Boys and other violent extremists that if they touch a hair on the Haitian community, they will be prosecuted. Go to https://joindeleteme.com/LEGALAF and use promo code LEGALAF for 20% off. Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Join the Legal AF Patreon: https://Patreon.com/LegalAF Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

donald trump boats criminals haitian doj proud boys sane michael cohen remarks springfield ohio criminal liability jessica denson michael popok

Criminal Law Chapter 4: Defenses to Criminal Liability + Q & A

criminals excuse justification defenses criminal law procedural criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 19, 2024 28:43

Chapter 4 delves into the various defenses to criminal liability, categorizing them into justifications, excuses, and procedural defenses. Justification defenses, such as self-defense, defense of others, and defense of property, acknowledge the act but argue it was warranted under the circumstances to prevent greater harm. Excuse defenses, including insanity, intoxication, infancy, duress, and mistake, recognize that certain conditions impair an individual's ability to form criminal intent or control their actions, making full accountability unjust. Procedural defenses like entrapment, statute of limitations, and double jeopardy focus on the fairness and integrity of the legal process, protecting individuals from government overreach, outdated prosecutions, and multiple trials for the same offense. Understanding these defenses is crucial for legal practitioners and individuals navigating the criminal justice system, ensuring that justice is served in a balanced and equitable manner. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Immunity

The Daily Beans

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 2, 2024 42:00

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024Today, in a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court has ruled that presidents have immunity; the Justice Department will charge Boeing as it seeks a plea deal; a Mexican woman formerly employed by Trump condemns the ex-president's 'Hispanic jobs' comment; President Biden announces he will not step aside as the Democratic nominee for president; Republican representative Victoria Spartz has been charged with a weapons violation; plus Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Promo Code:Go to drinkAG1.com/dailybeans to try AG1 and get a FREE 1-year supply of Vitamin D3 AND K2 AND 5 FREE AG1 Travel Packs with your first purchase.Tickets and LIVE show dates https://allisongill.comSubscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.com Justices give presidents immunity for official acts, further delaying Trump's trial (Washington Post)Justice Department to Charge Boeing, Seeks Guilty Plea From Planemaker (Boomberg)Rep. Spartz charged with weapons violation at DC airport (WISHTV | Channel 8)Mexican woman formerly employed by Trump condemns ex-president's 'Hispanic jobs' comment (Rawstory) Subscribe to Lawyers, Guns, And MoneyAd-free premium feed: https://lawyersgunsandmoney.supercast.comSubscribe for free everywhere else:https://lawyersgunsandmoney.simplecast.com/episodes/1-miami-1985Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Follow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Follow Mueller, She Wrote on Posthttps://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote?utm_source=TwitterAG&utm_medium=creator_organic&utm_campaign=muellershewrote&utm_content=FollowMehttps://muellershewrote.substack.comhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://www.threads.net/@muellershewrotehttps://www.tiktok.com/@muellershewrotehttps://instagram.com/muellershewroteDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyhttps://www.instagram.com/dgcomedyhttps://www.facebook.com/dgcomedyhttps://danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/From The Good NewsHeads up – The Seattle show is sold out. If you are in a position of having tickets to empty seats please send us a message at hello@muellershewrote.com – put “Seattle Tickets” in the subject line – and we'll see if we can connect you with people who would like to go, but were unable to get tickets.https://muellershewrote.substack.comAussie Hero Quilts (and Laundry Bags) (aussieheroquilts.org.au) Live Show Ticket Links:https://allisongill.com (for all tickets and show dates)Wednesday July 10th – Portland OR – Polaris Hall(with Dana!)Thursday July 11th – Seattle WA – The Triple Door(with Dana!)Thursday July 25th Milwaukee, WI https://tinyurl.com/Beans-MKESunday July 28th Nashville, TN - with Phil Williams https://tinyurl.com/Beans-TennWednesday July 31st St. Louis, MO https://tinyurl.com/Beans-STLFriday August 16th Washington, DC - with Andy McCabe, Pete Strzok, Glenn Kirschner https://tinyurl.com/Beans-in-DCSaturday August 24 San Francisco, CA https://tinyurl.com/Beans-SF Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/OrPatreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Criminal Law Chapter 2: General Principles of Criminal Liability

Early Edition with Kate Hawkesby

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 1, 2024 19:44

Chapter 2: General Principles of Criminal Liability Actus Reus (The Criminal Act) Actus reus, or the "guilty act," is a fundamental component of criminal liability. It refers to the physical act or unlawful omission that constitutes a crime. The actus reus can take various forms, including voluntary bodily movements, omissions to act when there is a legal duty to do so, and possession of illegal substances or items. Voluntary Acts: For an action to be considered actus reus, it must be a voluntary act. This means the act must be a conscious and willful bodily movement. Involuntary actions, such as those occurring during a seizure or under duress, do not typically constitute actus reus. Omissions: In some cases, failing to act can fulfill the actus reus requirement if there is a legal duty to act. Legal duties to act can arise from statutes, contracts, relationships, voluntary assumption of care, or creation of peril. For example, parents have a legal duty to provide care for their children, and failing to do so can result in criminal liability. Possession: Possession of illegal items (such as drugs or unregistered firearms) can constitute actus reus. Possession can be actual (physical control) or constructive (having control or the ability to control an item even if it is not in one's direct physical possession). Mens Rea (The Criminal Intent) Mens rea, or the "guilty mind," refers to the mental state or intent required to commit a crime. Different crimes require different levels of mens rea, ranging from specific intent to strict liability, where no intent is required. Specific Intent: Some crimes require that the defendant have a specific intent or purpose to bring about a particular result. Examples include premeditated murder and burglary. General Intent: General intent crimes require that the defendant intended to perform the act that constitutes the crime, but do not require intent to achieve a specific result. Examples include battery and rape. Recklessness: Recklessness involves consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a certain result will occur from one's actions. This level of mens rea is often seen in crimes like manslaughter. Negligence: Criminal negligence occurs when a person fails to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that their conduct will cause a particular result, and this failure constitutes a significant deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe. Strict Liability: Strict liability crimes do not require any mens rea. The mere commission of the act is sufficient for criminal liability. Examples include statutory rape and many regulatory offenses, such as selling alcohol to minors. Concurrence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea For a defendant to be found guilty of a crime, there must be a concurrence between the actus reus and the mens rea. This means that the defendant's criminal intent must coincide with the criminal act. For example, if a person plans to commit theft and then carries out the act, the intent and the action are concurrent. Causation and Harm Causation is a critical element in establishing criminal liability. It links the defendant's actions to the resulting harm. There are two types of causation: factual causation and legal causation. Factual Causation: Also known as "but-for" causation, it means that the harm would not have occurred but for the defendant's actions. For instance, if a person shoots another, and the victim dies as a result, the shooter is factually responsible for the death. Legal Causation: Also known as proximate causation, it considers whether the harm was a foreseeable result of the defendant's actions and whether it is fair to hold the defendant legally responsible. Proximate causation limits liability to those harms that are a direct and natural result of the defendant's actions. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

legal criminals possession criminal law involuntary concurrence causation general principles proximate criminal liability actus reus

Katherine Firkin: US Correspondent on the call for Boeing to be charged with criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 19, 2024 3:36

There's a renewed call for Boeing to be prosecuted after being grilled in the US Senate over its recent safety issues. US Justice officials have until July 7th to decide if it lays criminal charges. Family members of the 346 victims of two separate crashes involving Boeing planes five years ago were also at the hearing. US Correspondent Katherine Firkin told Mike Hosking that they're calling for criminal liability for the company, specifically the upper management. She says they want Boeing to be fined almost US$25 billion, and for officials to move forward with criminal prosecution. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

family senate criminals boeing charged us senate us justice us correspondent firkin criminal liability mike hosking listen abovesee

Why the Public Doesn't Get That No Harm or Criminal Liability Will Ever Come to Fauci

Lionel Nation

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 5, 2024 53:01

Why the Public Doesn't Get That No Harm or Criminal Liability Will Ever Come to Fauci

public criminals anthony fauci no harm criminal liability

Official Or Private (feat. John Fugelsang)

The Daily Beans

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 26, 2024 56:40

Friday, April 26th, 2024Today, explosive testimony from David Pecker in the 2016 Trump election interference trial; the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on presidential immunity in the Trump 2020 election subversion case; Harvey Weistein's New York conviction has been overturned; Lisa Page says the FBI failed to warn her about a stalker; a judge has denied Trump's motion for a new E Jean Carroll trial; and the feds are auctioning off Avenatti's private jet; plus Allison and Dana deliver your good news. Promo Code:For a limited time, HomeChef is offering you 18 Free Meals, plus Free Shipping on your first box, and Free Dessert for Life. At https://www.HomeChef.com/DAILYBEANS.Our Guest John Fugelsang:https://www.johnfugelsang.com/tmehttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-john-fugelsang-podcast/id1464094232The Sexy Liberal Save The World Comedy Tourhttps://sexyliberal.com Supreme Court signals further delay in Trump election interference case as it weighs immunity claims (NBC News)New York appeals court overturns Harvey Weinstein's sex crimes conviction and orders a new trial (CNN)Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Who Criticized Trump Says Bureau Failed to Warn Her About Stalker (NYT)A Private Jet Once Owned by Disgraced Lawyer Michael Avenatti Can Be Yours for $3.5 Million (Robb Report) Subscribe to Lawyers, Guns, And MoneyAd-free premium feed: https://lawyersgunsandmoney.supercast.comSubscribe for free everywhere else:https://lawyersgunsandmoney.simplecast.com/episodes/1-miami-1985Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Follow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Follow Mueller, She Wrote on Posthttps://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote?utm_source=TwitterAG&utm_medium=creator_organic&utm_campaign=muellershewrote&utm_content=FollowMehttps://muellershewrote.substack.comhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://www.threads.net/@muellershewrotehttps://www.tiktok.com/@muellershewrotehttps://instagram.com/muellershewroteDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyhttps://www.instagram.com/dgcomedyhttps://www.facebook.com/dgcomedyhttps://danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/From The Good NewsFalconry in the Garden (Napa, CA)https://bouchaine.com/products/falconry-in-the-gardenAlexandra Schmeling Fine Arthttps://www.alexandraschmeling.comAuthentically Katehttps://www.authenticallykate.blogNo Surprises In Medical Billing Informationhttps://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/no-surprises-understand-your-rights-against-surprise-medical-bills Live Show Ticket Links:https://allisongill.com (for all tickets and show dates)Sunday, June 2nd – Chicago IL – Schubas TavernFriday June 14th – Philadelphia PA – City WinerySaturday June 15th – New York NY – City WinerySunday June 16th – Boston MA – City WineryMonday June 17th Boston, MA https://tinyurl.com/Beans-Bos2Wednesday July 10th – Portland OR – Polaris Hall(with Dana!)Thursday July 11th – Seattle WA – The Triple Door(with Dana!)Thursday July 25th Milwaukee, WI https://tinyurl.com/Beans-MKESunday July 28th Nashville, TN - with Phil Williams https://tinyurl.com/Beans-TennWednesday July 31st St. Louis, MO https://tinyurl.com/Beans-STLFriday August 16th Washington, DC - with Andy McCabe, Pete Strzok, Glenn Kirschner https://tinyurl.com/Beans-in-DCSaturday August 24 San Francisco, CA https://tinyurl.com/Beans-SF Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/OrPatreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Criminal Liability for Individual Executives Following OSHA Inspection

OSHA 30/30 and TSCA 30/30

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 29, 2024 29:30

Keller and Heckman Partner Manesh Rath hosts OSHA 30/30, a webinar series that covers OSHA issues for 30 minutes every 30 days. Mr. Rath is a trial and appellate attorney with experience in general commercial litigation, wage and hour and class action litigation, occupational safety and health (OSHA) law, labor law, and employment law. This month's topic: Criminal Liability for Individual Executives Following OSHA Inspection

executives criminals individual keller osha inspection rath criminal liability

Parental criminal liability & student athlete unionization

Drivetime with DeRusha

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 6, 2024 31:55

Hour 1: Jason shared his concern with convicting parents over their kids' crimes. Then Dr. Charles Reid from the University of St. Thomas School of Law joins him to talk about the Dartmouth men's basketball team's attempt to unionize.

university law criminals parental dartmouth student athletes unionization thomas school criminal liability charles reid

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

criminals dismissed criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 1, 2024 27:19

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

Mastering the Bar Exam: Criminal Law - Defenses to Criminal Liability (Episode Five)

murder heat mastering criminals definition distinction defenses rationale manslaughter criminal law involuntary bar exam negligent involuntary manslaughter first degree murder second degree second degree murder premeditation criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 19, 2024 6:29

1. Murder: First Degree, Second Degree, Felony Murder Rule. Murder is considered one of the most heinous crimes and is heavily penalized. It involves the unlawful killing of another human being and is categorized based on the defendant's intent and the circumstances surrounding the killing. First-Degree Murder. Definition and Elements: First-degree murder is characterized by premeditation and deliberation. It involves planning the murder before it is carried out and is considered the most serious form of homicide. Premeditation and Deliberation: Premeditation means the defendant thought about the murder before it occurred, and deliberation implies the defendant considered the choice to kill and made a decision to do so. These elements distinguish first-degree murder from other forms of homicide. Examples and Application: Common scenarios include killings involving lying in wait, poison, or other pre-planned methods. Second-Degree Murder. Definition and Elements: Second-degree murder is typically defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion." Malice Aforethought: This form of murder requires malice aforethought, meaning the defendant had a reckless disregard for human life. It is less severe than first-degree murder but still represents a serious form of homicide. Examples and Application: This might include impulsive killings or situations where the intent to kill forms on the spot. Felony Murder Rule. Definition and Application: The felony murder rule applies when a death occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a felony. The rule allows a defendant to be charged with first-degree murder if a death – even an accidental one – occurs during certain felonies, such as robbery or arson. Rationale and Limitations: The rationale behind the rule is to deter felons from using lethal violence during the commission of a felony. However, some jurisdictions have limitations on the application of this rule, often requiring that the death be a foreseeable result of the felony. 2. Manslaughter: Voluntary and Involuntary. Manslaughter is a less severe form of homicide compared to murder, often categorized based on the defendant's state of mind and circumstances of the act. Voluntary Manslaughter. Definition and Elements: Voluntary manslaughter involves killing in the "heat of passion" in response to provocation. This provocation must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to lose self-control. Heat of Passion: The key element here is that the defendant must not have had time to "cool off" between the provocation and the killing. It mitigates, but does not excuse, the killing. Examples and Application: This might include killing a spouse upon immediately discovering their infidelity. Involuntary Manslaughter. Definition and Elements: Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a death results from a reckless act or criminal negligence. It does not involve the intent to kill or cause serious harm. Criminal Negligence: The defendant's actions must demonstrate a gross deviation from a reasonable standard of care, showing a disregard for human life. Examples and Application: A common example is vehicular homicide, where reckless driving leads to someone's death. 3. Negligent Homicide. Negligent homicide involves causing the death of another through criminal negligence. It's a less serious form of homicide compared to murder and manslaughter. Definition and Elements: This crime occurs when a person's negligence is so grossly negligent that it becomes criminal. This typically involves a failure to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation. Distinction from Manslaughter: The key difference between negligent homicide and involuntary manslaughter often lies in the degree of negligence. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Mastering the Bar Exam: Criminal Law - Defenses to Criminal Liability (Episode Four)

Ashurst Legal Outlook Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 12, 2024 7:05

1. Justifications: Self-Defense, Defense of Others, Defense of Property. Justifications are defenses where the defendant admits to committing the act but claims it was justified under the circumstances. These defenses acknowledge that, while the act was technically criminal, it was necessary in the context. Self-Defense. Definition and Elements: Self-defense is the right to prevent suffering force or violence through the use of a sufficient level of counteracting force or violence. The key elements include a reasonable belief of an imminent threat of unlawful force and the use of a proportionate amount of force in response. Reasonable Belief: The belief of threat must be both subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable. This means that the defendant must actually believe in the necessity of self-defense, and this belief must be one that a reasonable person would hold under the same circumstances. Proportionality: The force used in self-defense must be proportionate to the threat. Deadly force can only be used if the person reasonably believes that their life or that of another is in imminent danger. Defense of Others. Definition and Elements: This defense is similar to self-defense but is used to justify the use of force to protect another person. The defender must reasonably believe that the person they are defending is under an immediate threat of harm. Limits to the Defense: The same principles of reasonable belief and proportionality apply. The defender cannot use more force than is necessary and reasonable to protect the other person. Defense of Property. Definition and Elements: This defense allows individuals to use reasonable force to protect their property from theft, destruction, or trespass. Restrictions: Generally, the use of deadly force to protect property alone is not justified. The circumstances must indicate that the force was necessary to prevent a serious crime or protect human life. 2. Excuses: Insanity, Intoxication, Infancy, Duress, Mistake of Fact or Law. Excuse defenses argue that the defendant should not be held fully responsible due to a personal condition or circumstance at the time of the crime. Insanity. Legal Insanity: This is a defense based on the idea that, at the time of the crime, the defendant was suffering from a severe mental illness and was unable to understand the nature of their actions or distinguish right from wrong. Tests for Insanity: Different jurisdictions use different tests for insanity, including the M'Naghten Rule (focusing on the defendant's ability to understand the nature of the act), the Irresistible Impulse Test (inability to control actions), and the Model Penal Code's substantial capacity test. Intoxication. Voluntary Intoxication: Generally, voluntary intoxication is not a defense to most crimes. However, if a specific intent is an element of the crime, and the intoxication prevents the formation of such intent, it may be a valid defense. Involuntary Intoxication: If the intoxication is involuntary, it can be a defense if it prevents the defendant from having the requisite mental state for the crime. Infancy. Definition and Application: This defense is based on the age of the defendant. Children under a certain age (usually 7 or 10) are presumed incapable of committing a crime as they cannot form the necessary mens rea. Duress. Definition and Elements: Duress is a defense where the defendant argues that they committed the crime because they were threatened with immediate harm to themselves or others. It must be shown that the threat was of such severity that a reasonable person would have succumbed to it. Mistake of Fact or Law. Mistake of Fact: This defense applies when the defendant makes an honest and reasonable mistake about a factual matter, leading them to believe their actions were not criminal. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Corporate crime and investigations: How leaders can prepare for changes to criminal liability laws

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 8, 2024 27:40

With the UK set to introduce the most significant changes to corporate criminal liability laws for a generation, how can companies prepare? Fraud is a hot topic currently. New technologies and an economic downturn have triggered a huge uptick in these criminal offences worldwide. With new UK legislation in the pipeline to bolster efforts to prevent (and prosecute) corporate fraud, companies are scrambling to prepare. In this podcast episode, we look at the elevated responsibilities, liabilities, and risks for organisations – spanning controls, governance, frameworks, and more. Along the way, we highlight the issues that should be top of mind for various company leaders, including board chairs and directors, senior managers, chief risk officers, audit committees, and general counsels. To tackle these issues, Ashurst's Ruby Hamid is joined by an expert panel of colleagues including Nisha Sanghani, Neil Donovan, Matt Russell and Tom Mercer. This is the first episode in a continuing mini-series about corporate crime and investigations. To make sure you don't miss future episodes, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

spotify uk technology leaders crime laws corporate criminals fraud risks investigations matt russell ashurst criminal liability tom mercer

Mastering the Bar Exam: Criminal Law - Principles of Criminal Liability (Episode Two)

moving legal principles mastering criminals strict criminal law involuntary bar exam actus criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 29, 2023 5:42

Actus Reus (Guilty Act). Let's begin with the concept of actus reus, or the guilty act. In criminal law, for a behavior to be considered criminal, there must first be an act or conduct that is prohibited by law. Actus reus is not just about doing something but can also involve failing to act when there's a legal duty to do so. This could be a duty established by law, such as the duty to file taxes, or a duty that arises out of a specific relationship, like a parent's duty to care for their child. A fundamental principle here is that the act must be voluntary. Involuntary actions, such as movements made while asleep or unconscious, do not constitute actus reus. For instance, if someone commits what would ordinarily be a criminal act while sleepwalking, they have not performed an actus reus in the eyes of the law. It's important to distinguish between an act itself and the result of the act. For many crimes, the actus reus includes not only the act but also a specific result (like death in the case of murder). In such cases, the prosecution must prove both the act and the result to establish the actus reus. Mens Rea (Guilty Mind). Moving on to mens rea, or the guilty mind. This is about the defendant's mental state at the time of the act. The law recognizes different levels of mens rea, from intentional acts to reckless and negligent behavior. For many crimes, establishing mens rea is critical to proving guilt. Intention: The highest level of mens rea is intention, where the defendant has a specific aim or purpose to cause a particular result. Knowledge: This is where the defendant knows that their actions are almost certain to bring about a particular result. Recklessness: A person acts recklessly when they consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk. Negligence: This involves failing to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk where such failure is a deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe. Understanding the nuances of mens rea is essential because different crimes require different mental states. For example, first-degree murder requires intent, whereas manslaughter might only require recklessness or negligence. Strict Liability Crimes. Now, let's talk about strict liability crimes. These are offenses where mens rea is not a required element. The mere act of doing the prohibited act (actus reus) is enough to establish criminal liability. Common examples include traffic offenses and statutory rape. In these cases, the focus is on preventing certain actions, and the law does not concern itself with the actor's state of mind. Strict liability is controversial because it can lead to punishment without proof of a guilty mind. However, these crimes are typically less serious and carry lighter sentences. Causation: Factual and Legal. Finally, we come to causation. In criminal law, it's not enough to prove that the defendant committed the act and had the requisite mental state. The prosecution must also show that the defendant's actions caused the criminal result. This involves two types of causation: factual and legal. Factual Causation: This is often established by the "but for" test. But for the defendant's actions, would the result have occurred? If the answer is no, factual causation is established. Legal Causation: This is more complex. Here, the question is whether the defendant's actions were a substantial factor in bringing about the result. This involves looking at foreseeability and whether there were any intervening acts that broke the chain of causation. An important aspect of legal causation is the concept of foreseeability. The result must be a foreseeable outcome of the defendant's actions. If an unforeseeable event intervenes and is the primary cause of the result, the defendant may not be held legally responsible. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Criminal Law Class Session 13: Review and Bar Exam Preparation

uk crime companies criminals proposed investigations litigation arbitration proposed changes criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 10, 2023 8:12

Introduction to Criminal Law. Purpose and principles of criminal law. Purpose and principles of criminal law: This session introduces the fundamental principles of criminal law, emphasizing its role in defining and punishing wrongful conduct within society. Elements of a crime: Actus Reus and Mens Rea. Actus Reus refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes a criminal offense. Mens Rea refers to the mental state or intent behind the criminal act. It involves the guilty mind or the intent to commit the offense. Categories of crimes: Felonies vs. Misdemeanors Felonies are serious criminal offenses that typically carry severe penalties, including imprisonment for more than one year. Misdemeanors are less serious offenses, often resulting in less severe penalties, such as a jail sentence of one year or less. Model Penal Code (MPC) vs. Common Law Approach Purpose and principles of criminal law: This session introduces the fundamental principles of criminal law, emphasizing its role in defining and punishing wrongful conduct within society. The Model Penal Code (MPC) is a modern legal framework used in some jurisdictions to codify and standardize criminal laws, making them more consistent and coherent. The Common Law Approach relies on judicial decisions and precedents to define and interpret criminal laws. Homicide. Overview of homicide as a crime. Murder: Degrees and elements. Case Study: State v Johnson - Applying degrees of murder. Overview of homicide as a crime: Homicide is the unlawful killing of another person and is considered a criminal offense. Murder: Degrees and elements: Murder involves the intentional killing of another person, with degrees (first-degree, second-degree) defining the level of intent and severity of the crime. Assault and Battery. Defining assault and battery. Distinction between assault and battery. Assault with intent vs. simple assault. Case Study: People v Ramirez - Analyzing assault charges. Defining assault and battery: Assault is the threat of physical harm, while battery is the actual physical harm caused to another person. Distinction between assault and battery: Assault involves the threat of harm, whereas battery involves the actual application of force or contact. Assault with intent vs. simple assault: Assault with intent implies an intention to harm, while simple assault lacks specific intent to harm. Theft Crimes. Types of theft crimes. Legal elements of theft crimes. Case Study: State v Smith - Analyzing theft charges Types of theft crimes: Theft crimes encompass various offenses, including larceny, embezzlement, and robbery, involving the unlawful taking of someone else's property. Legal elements of theft crimes: These elements typically include taking, intent to permanently deprive, and the lack of consent. Sexual Offenses. Legal definitions and elements of sexual offenses. Consent and consent laws. Case Study: Commonwealth v Anderson - Analyzing a sexual assault case. Legal definitions and elements of sexual offenses: These offenses involve sexual misconduct and are defined by specific elements that must be proven in court. Consent and consent laws: Consent laws govern the requirement for voluntary and informed consent in sexual activities. Defenses to Criminal Liability. Insanity defense and its rules (M'Naghten, Irresistible Impulse, Durham). Self-defense and its elements. Case Study: State v Thompson - Analyzing self-defense claim. Insanity defense and its rules (M'Naghten, Irresistible Impulse, Durham): The insanity defense is based on a defendant's mental state at the time of the offense and is assessed under various legal standards, including M'Naghten, Irresistible Impulse, and Durham rules. Self-defense and its elements: Self-defense is a defense that justifies using force to protect oneself or others and involves elements such as the reasonable belief of an imminent threat. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Proposed changes to the criminal liability of companies in the UK and why they matter to you // Business Crime & Investigations

The Linklaters Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 4, 2023 16:25

Episode 10: Proposed changes to the criminal liability of companies in the UK and why they matter to you In our tenth episode, Francesca Bonner-Evans (Managing Associate) is joined by Alison Saunders (Consultant) and Jane Larner (Counsel), all from our Litigation, Arbitration and Investigations Practice in London. They consider some of the proposals in the current Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, including the introduction of a corporate failure to prevent fraud offence and the reframing of principles behind corporate criminal liability which will make it easier to prosecute companies for wrongdoing. They discuss implications for organisations operating in the UK and share thoughts on what businesses should be doing now to prepare. To listen to all episodes in this series, visit our The Most Important Issues in Business Crime podcast series.

Proposed changes to the criminal liability of companies in the UK and why they matter to you // Business Crime & Investigations

Linklaters – Payments Monthly – Our view on payments law and regulation

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 4, 2023 16:25

Episode 10: Proposed changes to the criminal liability of companies in the UK and why they matter to you In our tenth episode, Francesca Bonner-Evans (Managing Associate) is joined by Alison Saunders (Consultant) and Jane Larner (Counsel), all from our Litigation, Arbitration and Investigations Practice in London. They consider some of the proposals in the current Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, including the introduction of a corporate failure to prevent fraud offence and the reframing of principles behind corporate criminal liability which will make it easier to prosecute companies for wrongdoing. They discuss implications for organisations operating in the UK and share thoughts on what businesses should be doing now to prepare. To listen to all episodes in this series, visit our The Most Important Issues in Business Crime podcast series.

uk crime companies criminals proposed investigations litigation arbitration proposed changes criminal liability

Criminal Law Bar Prep: Class Session 6: Defenses to Criminal Liability

state class defense thompson criminals deadly durham generally self defense defenses criminal law criminal liability bar prep

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 22, 2023 4:31

The Insanity Defense: M'Naghten, Irresistible Impulse, Durham. The insanity defense is a complex and controversial area of criminal law. It asserts that the defendant should not be held criminally responsible for their actions due to a mental illness or defect at the time of the offense. Let's explore some of the prominent insanity defenses: M'Naghten Rule: Under the M'Naghten rule, a defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity if they were unable to understand the nature and quality of their actions or if they did not know that their actions were wrong due to a mental disorder. Irresistible Impulse: This defense focuses on the defendant's inability to control their actions as a result of a mental disorder, even if they understood that their actions were wrong. It emphasizes the concept of volitional impairment. Durham Rule: The Durham rule, also known as the "product" test, states that a defendant is not criminally responsible if their unlawful act was the product of their mental illness. This rule provides a broader scope for the insanity defense. The application and acceptance of these defenses can vary widely by jurisdiction, and legal standards continue to evolve. Self-Defense and Defense of Others. Self-defense and defense of others are affirmative defenses that allow a person to use force, including deadly force, to protect themselves or someone else from imminent harm. These defenses are rooted in the principle of necessity and the right to protect one's life or the lives of others. Key elements include: Imminence: The threat must be immediate, and the use of force must be necessary to counteract the threat. Proportionality: The level of force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat. Deadly force is generally only justified when facing a threat of death or serious bodily harm. Reasonable Belief: The defender must have a reasonable belief that the use of force is necessary to protect against the threat. Case Study: State v Thompson - Analyzing Self-Defense Claim. To better understand these concepts, let's examine State v Thompson. In this case, the defendant is charged with assault after using force against an aggressor who threatened to harm them. The defendant claims self-defense. In this scenario, we must evaluate whether the defendant's actions meet the criteria for self-defense. Was the threat imminent? Was the level of force used reasonable and proportionate to the threat? Did the defendant genuinely believe their actions were necessary to protect themselves? This case study illustrates how self-defense claims are assessed in real-world legal scenarios. Now for our first question: Can the insanity defense result in the defendant's release, or is it more likely to lead to commitment to a mental institution? The outcome of an insanity defense can vary significantly based on the jurisdiction and the specific case. In some instances, a successful insanity defense may result in the defendant being committed to a mental institution for treatment and evaluation rather than being incarcerated in a traditional prison. The goal is to provide treatment and address the underlying mental health issues. However, the length of commitment and the specific conditions can vary, and some individuals may eventually be released if they are deemed no longer a danger to themselves or others. Now our second question: Can you use self-defense if you were the initial aggressor in a confrontation? Generally, the right to claim self-defense is limited if you were the initial aggressor in a confrontation. In many jurisdictions, if you start a physical altercation, you may lose the right to use force in self-defense unless you withdraw from the confrontation and communicate your intention to cease the aggression. The law typically encourages de-escalation and discourages individuals from provoking violence and then claiming self-defense. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Daniel Penny Indicted, Fed Pauses Hikes…For Now, Ex-Starbucks Employee Awarded $26.5M, Bipartisan AI Legislation, Plus New SCOTUS Decisions

Jordan Is My Lawyer

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 16, 2023 34:00

1. Update: Daniel Penny Indicted for Jordan Neely Death on NYC Subway (2:59)2. Fed Announces Pause on Interest Rate Hikes….For Now; What This Means and What to Expect Going Forward (5:24)3. NJ Jury Awards Former Starbucks Employee $25.6M in Wrongful Termination Suit; Why She'll Only See a Fraction of that Amount (10:29)4. Two U.S. Senators Introduce Bipartisan AI Legislation to Allow for Civil and Criminal Liability for Online Platforms (21:26)5. SCOTUS Released Three New Decisions on Thursday; Here's What They Say (26:01)If you enjoyed this episode, please leave me a review and share it with those you know that also appreciate unbiased news!Subscribe to Jordan's weekly free newsletter featuring hot topics in the news, trending lawsuits, and more.Follow Jordan on Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube.All sources for this episode can be found here.

DEAR PAO: Criminal liability of an accused in rape includes those of his co-conspirators | May 17, 2023

dear criminals stitcher acast rape includes amazon music accused deezer conspirators dailymotion digital edition co conspirators podcasts spotify criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later May 17, 2023 6:45

DEAR PAO: Criminal liability of an accused in rape includes those of his co-conspirators | May 17, 2023Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein#TheManilaTimes #DEARPAO Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cakes hopes Mary Jo White report brings criminal liability on Dan Snyder?

The Sports Junkies

Play Episode Listen Later May 15, 2023 0:59

After discussing the report with ESPN's Don Van Natta, the Junkies were talking about the report itself, when Cakes went all in on Snyder, calling him 'a scumbag and a weasel' and hoping the report might 'put Snyder in handcuffs.'

nfl football espn criminals hopes snyder cakes washington commanders dan snyder junkies don van natta criminal liability mary jo white

DEAR PAO: Criminal liability of a minor | March 7, 2023

dear criminals stitcher acast minor amazon music deezer dailymotion digital edition podcasts spotify criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 7, 2023 4:05

https://www.manilatimes.net/2023/03/07/legal-advice/criminal-liability-of-a-minor/1881574Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tuneinSoundcloud: https://tmt.ph/soundcloud #TheManilaTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

RRNews 304: Lied Suddenly

Revelations Radio News

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 13, 2023 96:46

Producers of RRNews 304: Danny – Medford, ORKristine – Manchester, NHAnonymous – Parts Unknown Links: Will We Fall For the Latest Expert Psyop Protecting Pfizer from Criminal Liability? Zach on Twitter: “#PfizerLiedPeopleDied #DiedSuddenlyNews https://t.co/f5WcPbpeYP” / …

producers lied criminal liability

RRNews 304: Lied Suddenly

Revelations Radio Network

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 13, 2023

Producers of RRNews 304: Danny – Medford, ORKristine – Manchester, NHAnonymous – Parts Unknown Links: Will We Fall For the Latest Expert Psyop Protecting Pfizer from Criminal Liability? Zach on Twitter: “#PfizerLiedPeopleDied #DiedSuddenlyNews https://t.co/f5WcPbpeYP” / …

world bible news teaching study conspiracies theory preaching producers lied nwo nephilim apologetic criminal liability

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

criminals dismissed criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 2, 2023 27:19

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

LEGAL: Exemption from criminal liability in crimes against property | Nov. 23, 2022

legal criminals stitcher acast property crimes amazon music deezer exemption dailymotion digital edition podcasts spotify criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 23, 2022 4:37

LEGAL: Exemption from criminal liability in crimes against property | Nov. 23, 2022 Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tuneinSoundcloud: https://tmt.ph/soundcloud #TheManilaTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Felipe Sottorff Araya on Corporate Criminal Liability in South America [Podcast]

Compliance Perspectives

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 22, 2022 8:45

By Adam Turteltaub Go back roughly twenty years and you wouldn't find a country in South America that had corporate criminal liability laws. Today, though, the picture has changed dramatically. Felipe Sottorff Araya (LinkedIn), a compliance consultant from Chile who recently moved to the US, reveals that half of the countries now have corporate criminal liability statutes, the latest being Colombia. That doesn't mean they all have the same laws. There are significant differences among the countries when it comes to triggers for corporate criminal liability. Some have adopted broad rules; others have taken a narrow route. There are common elements, however. Bribery is treated as a corporate liability trigger throughout. In addition, the crime has to be committed to benefit the company. Another common element: expectations for compliance programs. Each country follows the seven elements approach found throughout the world. Listen in to learn more about the changing landscape of corporate criminal liability and also learn where organizations are most likely to fall short in their compliance efforts.

corporate colombia chile criminals south america bribery araya america podcast criminal liability

LEGAL: Death extinguishes criminal liability | Sept. 28, 2022

death legal criminals stitcher acast amazon music deezer dailymotion digital edition podcasts spotify criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 28, 2022 4:45

https://www.manilatimes.net/2022/09/28/legal-advice/death-extinguishes-criminal-liability/1860103Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tuneinSoundcloud: https://tmt.ph/soundcloud #TheManilaTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Blue State Blues

Liberty Nation with Tim Donner

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 23, 2022 39:53

Seg 1 – Blue State Strongholds on the Brink – with columnist Joe SchaefferSeg 2 – The Immortal Mistakes of Big Government – with economist Andrew MoranSeg 3 – Human Trafficking? Depends on Who Does It – with constitutional attorney Scott D. CosenzaSeg 4 – Criminal Liability for Ron DeSantis? – with constitutional attorney Scott D. Cosenza

freedom politics blues economy conservatives brink ron desantis human trafficking big government blue states criminal liability

MTP NOW July 12 — Jan. 6th witness testimony; Trump's potential criminal liability; Biden's Middle East trip

NBC Meet the Press

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 12, 2022 43:38

Dramatic testimony from Tuesday's January 6th hearing reveals former President Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election and alleged tampering with hearing witnesses. Carol Lam and Carol Leonnig analyze the case presented by the Jan. 6th committee and Trump's potential criminal liability. John Podhoretz and Basil Smikle join the Meet the Press NOW roundtable. President Biden prepares to depart for his Middle East trip as pressure mounts at home.

donald trump joe biden trip middle east witness testimony criminals january 6th dramatic carol leonnig biden's middle east john podhoretz criminal liability tuesday's january

The RSB Show 5-13-22 - Nurse criminal liability, Tia Severino, Next Steps Conference

The Robert Scott Bell Show

Play Episode Listen Later May 16, 2022 133:11

The RSB Show 5-13-22 - Revive the old constitution, Canadian soldier charged, Long Covid alternative approach, Remdesivir Disastrous, Nurse criminal liability, Tia Severino, Next Steps Conference

canadian conference nurses criminals next steps revive long covid severino criminal liability

Monday February 7, 2022 Jennifer Arlen's Political Theory of Corporate Criminal Liability

Corporate Crime Reporter Morning Minute

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 9, 2022 1:00

Monday February 7, 2022 Jennifer Arlen's Political Theory of Corporate Criminal Liability

corporate criminals political theory criminal liability

New details on Trump's ‘Spidey-sense of criminal liability' in bid to steal power

All In with Chris Hayes

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 2, 2022 44:02

Guests: Jacqueline Alemany, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Robert Orr, Jelani Cobb, Beto O'RourkeTonight: Donald Trump himself was in on the scheme to seize voting machines—the most incriminating evidence of the Trump coup plot yet, the bag man he used to help him do it, and what the investigation is discovering from torn Trump documents. Then, the Republican suing to disqualify Madison Cawthorn from Congress for engaging in insurrection joins live. Plus, Jelani Cobb on the right-wing crackdown on teaching Black history as Black History Month begins. And one year after a certain senator's great escape to Cancun, Beto O'Rourke says Texas has failed to prepare for another freeze—and he's here live.

texas black donald trump congress republicans criminals black history month steal cancun new details sheldon whitehouse jelani cobb spidey sense criminal liability robert orr

Criminal law (2022): Scope of criminal liability: Vicarious liability

history england germany italy risk exercise criminals scope criminal law crs vicarious internalizing ypres criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 29, 2021 8:12

Under criminal law, a principal is any actor who is primarily responsible for a criminal offense. Such an actor is distinguished from others who may also be subject to criminal liability as accomplices, accessories or conspirators. The legal principle of vicarious liability applies to hold one person liable for the actions of another when engaged in some form of joint or collective activity. History. Before the emergence of states which could bear the high costs of maintaining national policing and impartial court systems, local communities operated self-help systems to keep the peace and to enforce contracts. Until the thirteenth century, one of the institutions that emerged was an involuntary collective responsibility for the actions committed by one of the groups. This was formalized into the community responsibility system (CRS) which was enforced by a fear of loss of community reputation and of retaliation by the injured community if the appropriate compensation was not paid. In some countries where the political system supported it, collective responsibility was gradually phased out in favor of individual responsibility. In Germany and Italy, collective systems were in operation as late as the sixteenth century. While communities were relatively small and homogeneous, CRS could work well, but as populations increased and merchants began to trade across ever wider territories, the system failed to match the emerging societies' needs for more personal accountability and responsibility. In England, Henry the 1st allowed London to opt out of the CRS and to appoint a sheriff and justices in 1133, and between 1225 and 1232, Henry the 3rd assured the merchants of Ypres that none of them "will be detained in England nor will they be partitions for another's debts". Nevertheless, the idea of imposing liability on another despite a lack of culpability never really disappeared and courts have developed the principle that an employer can incur liability for the acts and omissions of an employee if committed by the employee in the course of employment and if the employer has the right to control the way in which the employee carries out his or her duties (respondeat superior). The imposition of vicarious liability in these circumstances has been justified on the following grounds: Exercise of control: If penalties are serious enough, it is assumed that rational employers will take steps to ensure that employees avoid injuring third parties. On the other hand, rational employers may choose to rely on independent contractors for risky operations and processes. Risk spreading: Many consider it socially preferable to impose the cost of an action on a person connected to it, even if a degree removed, rather than on the person who suffered injury or loss. This principle is also sometimes known as the "deep pocket" justification. Internalizing the social costs of activities: The employer usually (though not always) passes on the cost of compensating injury or loss to the customers and clients. As a result, the private cost of the product or service will better reflect its social cost. These justifications may work against one another. For example, insurance will increase the ability to do risk spreading, but will reduce incentives for the exercise of control. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Criminal law (2022): Scope of criminal liability: Corporate liability

united states canada australia nature german italian corporate criminals countries generally scope criminal law criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 22, 2021 11:30

Corporate liability, also referred to as liability of legal persons, determines the extent to which a company as a legal person can be held liable for the acts and omissions of the natural persons it employs and, in some legal systems, for those of other associates and business partners. Since corporations and other business entities are a major part of the economic landscape, corporate liability is a key element in effective law enforcement for economic crimes. A 2016 mapping of 41 countries' corporate liability systems shows wide variations in approaches to liability and that corporate liability is a dynamic area of legal innovation and evolution. The term legal person refers to a business entity (often a corporation, but possibly other legal entities, as specified by law) that has both legal rights (for instance, the right to sue) as well as legal obligations. Because, at a public policy level, the growth and prosperity of society depends on the business community, governments must carefully tailor the extent and ways that each permitted form of business entity can be held liable. Important design elements of corporate liability systems include jurisdiction, successor liability, related and unrelated entities as a source of liability, sanctions and mitigating factors. Poorly designed or non-existent corporate liability systems can make it impossible to enforce laws effectively and can lead to profound injustices for individuals or entities seeking accountability and redress for wrongdoing. Nature of corporate liability. Countries can base their corporate liability systems in criminal or non-criminal law (that is, administrative or civil law) or in both. They can also enact legislation that creates liability for legal persons in specific areas of law (for example, covering health and safety, and product safety issues). Under this approach, the wording of a statutory offense specifically attaches liability to the corporation as the principal or joint principal with a human agent. Generally, countries' approaches to this issue reflect long-standing and diverse legal traditions. For example, Australia and Canada anchor their corporate liability systems in criminal law, while the German and Italian systems are based in administrative law. Some jurisdictions use criminal and civil systems in parallel, thereby expanding options for pursuing legal accountability for legal persons and for making political judgments on when to use the criminal law in order to maximize the impact of those cases that are prosecuted. The United States' system of corporate liability is an example of one that incorporates both criminal and civil law elements. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Trump political potency softening as criminal liability puts him in awkward position

The Rachel Maddow Show

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 18, 2021 44:55

Tonight's guests are Chuck Rosenberg, former federal prosecutor; and Martin Peone, former Obama Senate liaison.

donald trump political position criminals awkward puts softening potency criminal liability chuck rosenberg

Criminal law (2022): Scope of criminal liability: Complicity

criminals scope criminal law complicity criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 15, 2021 15:25

Complicity is the participation in a completed criminal act of an accomplice, a partner in the crime who aids or encourages (abets) other perpetrators of that crime, and who shares with them an intent to act to complete the crime. A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of a crime if they purpose the completion of a crime, and toward that end, if that person solicits or encourages the other person, or aids or attempts to aid in planning or committing the crime, or has legal duty to prevent that crime but fails to make an effort to prevent it properly. Unlike attempt, solicitation, and conspiracy, which are crimes in and of themselves, complicity is not itself a crime but is a way of committing a crime. It also differs from an attempt, solicitation, and conspiracy in that it always depends on that crime having been completed (for example, it is never inchoate). Complicity does not require causation of the crime, merely participating in the commission of the crime. In cases where one is complicit because of a failure to act when one has a duty to act to prevent a crime, complicity differs from omission in that liability for complicity arises from the related to other perpetrators, whereas liability for omission arises from a duty relationship to the victim. Common law traditionally distinguished between a "principal" perpetrator who is primarily responsible for a crime and an "accessory" perpetrator who is less responsible. However, modern approaches abandon this distinction, and "a person is legally accountable for the conduct of another when he is an accomplice of the other person in the commission of the crime". For two persons to be complicit in a crime that does not involve negligence, they must share the same criminal intent; "there must be a community of purpose, partnership in the unlawful undertaking". An accomplice "is a partner in the crime, the chief ingredient of which is always intent". In crimes not involving negligence, there should be evidence that an accomplice had knowledge of the intention of their partner. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Criminal law (2022): Scope of criminal liability: Accomplice

united states english criminals scope criminal law aiding accomplice accomplices criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 8, 2021 5:27

Under the English common law, an accomplice is a person who actively participates in the commission of a crime, even if they take no part in the actual criminal offense. For example, in a bank robbery, the person who points the gun at the teller and demands the money is guilty of armed robbery. Anyone else directly involved in the commission of the crime, such as the lookout or the getaway car driver, is an accomplice, even if in the absence of an underlying offense keeping a lookout or driving a car would not be an offense. An accomplice differs from an accessory in that an accomplice is present at the actual crime, and could be prosecuted even if the main criminal (the principal) is not charged or convicted. An accessory is generally not present at the actual crime, and may be subject to lesser penalties than an accomplice or principal. At law, an accomplice has lesser guilt than the person he or she is assisting, is subject to lesser prosecution for the same crime, and faces the smaller criminal penalties. As such, the three accomplices to the bank robbery above can also to a degree be found guilty of armed robbery even if only one stole money. The fairness of the doctrine that the accomplice is still guilty has been subject to much discussion, particularly in cases of capital crimes. Accomplices have been prosecuted for felony murder even if the actual person who committed the murder died at the crime scene or otherwise did not face capital punishment. In jurisdictions based on the common law, the concept of an accomplice has often been heavily modified by statute, or replaced by new concepts entirely. United States. Aiding and abetting is a provision in United States criminal law, for situations where it cannot be shown the party personally carried out the criminal offense, but where another person may have carried out the illegal act(s) as an agent of the charged, working together with or under the direction of the charged party, who is an accessory to the crime. It is derived from the United States Code (USC), section two of title 18: (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever knowingly and willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed. by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal. Where the term "principal" refers to any actor who is primarily responsible for a criminal offense. An accomplice was often referred to as an abettor. This term is not in active use in the United States, having been replaced by accomplice. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Criminal law (2022): Scope of criminal liability: Accessory

latin criminals elements separate scope relative accessory criminal law criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 1, 2021 14:16

An accessory is a person who assists in, but does not actually participate in, the commission of a crime. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree: The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind"), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (Latin for "guilty act"). If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalized and/or limited help and encouragement. Elements. In some jurisdictions, an accessory is distinguished from an accomplice, who normally is present at the crime and participates in some way. An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being committed, will be committed, or has been committed. A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way. The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment. Relative severity of penalties. The punishment tariff for accessories varies in different jurisdictions, and has varied at different periods of history. In some times and places accessories have been subject to lesser penalties than principals (the persons who actually commit the crime). In other accessories are considered the same as principals in theory, although in a particular case an accessory may be treated less severely than a principal. In some times and places accessories before the fact (for example, with knowledge of the crime before it is committed) have been treated differently from accessories after the fact (for example, those who aid a principal after a crime has been committed, but had no role in the crime itself). Common law traditionally considers an accessory just as guilty as the principal(s) in a crime, and subject to the same penalties. Separate and lesser punishments exist by statute in many jurisdictions. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Defendant Dawn Bancroft's Threats, Judge Emmet Sullivan's Concerns & Trump's 1/6 Criminal Liability

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 10:35

As more defendant's who attacked the US Capitol on January 6 have their cases resolved with misdemeanor pleas, federal judges are questioning the way cases are being handled by the Department of Justice. Here are the two questions posed by Judge Emmet Sullivan, the judge presiding over the case of insurrection defendant Dawn Bancroft, and how those two questions can be answered. This video also discusses why the facts inarguably support the conclusion that Donald Trump is criminally culpable for the January 6 attack on the Capitol. For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit: https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkirschner/ Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. To subscribe to the podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/JusticeMatters Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Defendant Dawn Bancroft's Threats, Judge Emmet Sullivan's Concerns & Trump's 1/6 Criminal Liability

donald trump judge threats concerns capitol january 6th us capitol defendants bancroft justice matters criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2021 11:20

As more defendant's who attacked the US Capitol on January 6 have their cases resolved with misdemeanor pleas, federal judges are questioning the way cases are being handled by the Department of Justice. Here are the two questions posed by Judge Emmet Sullivan, the judge presiding over the case of insurrection defendant Dawn Bancroft, and how those two questions can be answered. This video also discusses why the facts inarguably support the conclusion that Donald Trump is criminally culpable for the January 6 attack on the Capitol. For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit: https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkirschner/ Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. To subscribe to the podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/JusticeMatters Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Super Natural Son Day Edition: Notice of Criminal Liability Issued to Justice Susan A. Gomery

love plan blessings criminals supernatural claim plans default liable criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 15, 2021 50:24

Well, it's done! The Notice of Criminal Liability is Officially on the International Public Record!!! Sally A. Gomery has 30 days to respond to the Notice or be Noted in Default and Liable for $2,510,800.00. So dismissing the Claim as frivolous and vexatious is making for a bigger payday. Even better, I have the contingency Plan of contingency Plans if I am not able to collect on Sally A. Gomery's performance bond. All this and more on today's Show, People! It is one I don't think You Will Wish to miss. Love and Blessings,

The vexing question of corporate criminal liability

Taxing Matters

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 13, 2021 21:16

Many commentators have questioned whether the law relating to corporate criminal liability is still fit for purpose or whether it is due a significant overhaul. The Law Commission has been asked by the Ministry of Justice, Home Office, Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy, HM Treasury and the Attorney General's Office, to consult on how the law of corporate criminal liability functions and how, if at all, it should change. The Law Commission is inviting anyone with an interest in this area to make their voice heard by 31 August 2021 at Corporate criminal liability Consultation.With the potential for significant change on the horizon, we are joined by David Allan, a criminal law reform lawyer with the Law Commission who is working on the corporate criminal liability project, to discuss how the law currently operates and some of the suggested changes to corporate criminal liability that have been put forward. ReferencesCorporate criminal liability projectCorporate criminal liability Discussion PaperCorporate criminal liability Consultation See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

office ministry corporate criminals home office attorney generals consultation industrial strategy hm treasury law commission business energy david allan criminal liability

Monday 2Aug21 Next Phase: Get Rid of the Unvaxxed Control Group

The David Knight Show

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 2, 2021 182:41

TOPICS by TIMECODE1:56 Can't handle the truth? Just 2 days after Axios pressured them to start censoring podcasts and they claimed they didn't have the manpower to do it, our podcast was banned by Spotify without notice or explanation. But there's still more than a dozen places you can find the podcast.11:18 More bans of legitimate information by Twitter and Apple bans an app that helps unvaccinated people connect, “Unjected”19:41 Why are they so adamant that 100% of the population be vaccinated? Is it to remove the “control group” of unvaccinated to cover their crime against humanity? 30:34 Russian Immigrants: CRT is EXACTLY What Was Taught in Soviet Schools. Bill Maher sees it in the cancel mob & the Olympics. But those who escaped Soviet Union say American schools are teaching identical ideas, even the terminology is unchanged, merely translated into English.55:16 Marxist Ilhan Omar wants to make the “stimmie” monthly Universal Basic Income of $1,200 — communist allowance long supported by the Neo-Marxists of Silicon Valley. Judge prohibits Arkansas governor from stopping the “stimmie”. Politicized, judicial supremacy1:15:13 Remember Soros' putting millions into local DA races and state Attorneys General? His DA in San Francisco shows what Soros wants1:22:56 Listener letter: exiting the system and relocating — it's good! Californians' support of gun control is dropping as lawless anarchy is supported by govt. And listener gives an update for Electric Vehicle power usage vs the banned game computer.1:46:42 New birth control method uses injected nanoparticles steered by magnets and heated by EMF. Sound familiar? China is touting it as a substitute for condoms.1:58:10 Another COVID Treatment Shut Down by FDA. FDA has changed supplement “rules” to replace cheaper natural medicine with patentable BigPharma drugs.2:12:46 FDA Fast Tracks Opioid That's the Same as Oxycontin. They say it has an “abuse deterrent”. That's a joke. Here's how FDA is enabling the next wave of opioid addiction…2:20:39 Washington Post Admits “Herd Immunity” Doesn't Apply to Trump Shots. Forget about the “herd mentality” angle of the mandatory “vaccinators”. We were told that you had to get the jab to protect others. But now even mainstream media admits the fully jabbed transmit virus as much or more than the unvaccinated.2:23:03 Leaked Pfizer Agreement Demands Protection from CRIMINAL Liability. They knew. So do the govt officials doing deals with them2:43:01 Ethics or Profits? Franklin Graham, Max Lucado, Catholic Church Shill for BigPharma Shots. Graham & Lucado fearmongering over their own “breakthrough cases”, and a listener writes on the Roman Catholic refusal to attest to her objections to the ethics of cannibal medicine2:52:10 The global agenda is moving in “lockstep” as they planned. And now the politicians in EVERY country are making it clear that “the voluntary phase is over”. Unions are pushing back against government mandates. Will they stay the course or will their leaders accept 30 pieces of silver?Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughZelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Mail: David Knight POB 1323 Elgin, TX 78621

Monday 2Aug21 Next Phase: Get Rid of the Unvaxxed Control Group

The REAL David Knight Show

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 2, 2021 182:40

1:56 Can't handle the truth? Just 2 days after Axios pressured them to start censoring podcasts and they claimed they didn't have the manpower to do it, our podcast was banned by Spotify without notice or explanation. But there's still more than a dozen places you can find the podcast. 11:18 More bans of legitimate information by Twitter and Apple bans an app that helps unvaccinated people connect, “Unjected” 19:41 Why are they so adamant that 100% of the population be vaccinated? Is it to remove the “control group” of unvaccinated to cover their crime against humanity? 30:34 Russian Immigrants: CRT is EXACTLY What Was Taught in Soviet Schools. Bill Maher sees it in the cancel mob & the Olympics. But those who escaped Soviet Union say American schools are teaching identical ideas, even the terminology is unchanged, merely translated into English. 55:16 Marxist Ilhan Omar wants to make the “stimmie” monthly Universal Basic Income of $1,200 — communist allowance long supported by the Neo-Marxists of Silicon Valley. Judge prohibits Arkansas governor from stopping the “stimmie”. Politicized, judicial supremacy 1:15:13 Remember Soros' putting millions into local DA races and state Attorneys General? His DA in San Francisco shows what Soros wants 1:22:56 Listener letter: exiting the system and relocating — it's good! Californians' support of gun control is dropping as lawless anarchy is supported by govt. And listener gives an update for Electric Vehicle power usage vs the banned game computer. 1:46:42 New birth control method uses injected nanoparticles steered by magnets and heated by EMF. Sound familiar? China is touting it as a substitute for condoms. 1:58:10 Another COVID Treatment Shut Down by FDA. FDA has changed supplement “rules” to replace cheaper natural medicine with patentable BigPharma drugs. 2:12:46 FDA Fast Tracks Opioid That's the Same as Oxycontin. They say it has an “abuse deterrent”. That's a joke. Here's how FDA is enabling the next wave of opioid addiction… 2:20:39 Washington Post Admits “Herd Immunity” Doesn't Apply to Trump Shots. Forget about the “herd mentality” angle of the mandatory “vaccinators”. We were told that you had to get the jab to protect others. But now even mainstream media admits the fully jabbed transmit virus as much or more than the unvaccinated. 2:23:03 Leaked Pfizer Agreement Demands Protection from CRIMINAL Liability. They knew. So do the govt officials doing deals with them 2:43:01 Ethics or Profits? Franklin Graham, Max Lucado, Catholic Church Shill for BigPharma Shots. Graham & Lucado fearmongering over their own “breakthrough cases”, and a listener writes on the Roman Catholic refusal to attest to her objections to the ethics of cannibal medicine 2:52:10 The global agenda is moving in “lockstep” as they planned. And now the politicians in EVERY country are making it clear that “the voluntary phase is over”. Unions are pushing back against government mandates. Will they stay the course or will their leaders accept 30 pieces of silver? Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show Or you can send a donation through Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.com Cash App at: $davidknightshow BTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7 Mail: David Knight POB 1323 Elgin, TX 78621

Non-payment of service charge, no criminal liability

Labor Law PH

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 27, 2021 2:21

May an employer be held criminally liable for non-payment of service charge? | Episode 36, Labor Law PH Podcast | Discussions by Atty. Jericho "Jake" Del Puerto | www.laborlaw.ph | laborlawdotph@gmail.com

payments atty service charge criminal liability

Mergers by absorption and transfer of criminal liability in France

Disputes in Perspective

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 7, 2021 11:40

Following the landmark decision handed down by the criminal division of the French Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) in November 2020, Daniel Kadar and Pierre-Céols Fischer discuss the ground-breaking way the Court treated the transfer of criminal liability between legal entities in a merger-absorption transaction. For more information, please visit Reed Smith's Litigation & Dispute Resolution page.

france court criminals fischer mergers absorption reed smith cassation criminal liability pierre c

Magical Monday Motive A Sean: Reply to My Notice of Criminal Liability

canada criminals magical ottawa provision motive legally charter remedies criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 22, 2021 31:21

The city of Ottawa finally responds to the Notice of Criminal Liability, Housing Renewal package finally arrives, and the city's legal counsel, Genevieve Langlais confirms that the renewal package was not mailed out to Me until June 16th (two days before I was expected to have it returned). Legally binding instruments discussed on this Podcast - The Justice of Canada website Provision 24(1) Remedies for Charter violations.

NCLA Reacts to NLRB Brief in Ben Domenech Tweet Case; Interior's Proposed Rule Creates Criminal Liability for Incidental Bird Deaths

Administrative Static Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 11, 2021 25:00

NCLA Reacts to NLRB Brief in Ben Domenech Tweet Case In this episode, Mark asks NCLA Litigation Counsel Adi Dynar about the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) Third Circuit brief filed this week, which once again downplays the crucial jurisdiction arguments made by NCLA in FDRLST Media, LLC v. NLRB. In its brief, NLRB called NCLA's subject-matter and personal jurisdiction arguments immaterial. But NLRB cannot ignore U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The First Amendment does not become optional every time NLRB chooses to make it optional. NCLA is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to reverse the flawed ruling of NLRB from last November, which concluded that a satirical tweet posted by FDRLST co-founder and publisher Ben Domenech on his private account constituted an unfair labor practice by his employer. FDRLST Media, the publisher of the online magazine The Federalist, is fighting back because NLRB has neither subject-matter jurisdiction over this case nor personal jurisdiction over the company. Read more about the case here: https://nclalegal.org/joel-f-v-fdrlst-media-llc/ Interior's Proposed Rule Creates Criminal Liability for Incidental Bird Deaths Later in the episode, Mark explains NCLA's opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) ‘incidental take' rule for migratory birds. Any activity resulting in the incidental death of migratory birds would be considered a crime under a proposed rule by FWS. The rule, Regulations Governing Take of Migratory Birds, repeals a Trump Administration final rule which correctly defines the scope of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), as Congress did, to exclude criminal liability for the incidental death of migratory birds. NCLA filed comments objecting to the proposed rule, which greatly expands the interpretation of the MBTA so as to grant the Department of Justice the discretion to prosecute all actions that have the mere effect of killing migratory birds. According to FWS's new position, any activity that unintentionally causes the death of a migratory bird—such as running into a bird while driving or a windmill blade striking a bird—is a crime. Individuals must rely on the grace of the federal government to avoid being prosecuted. The MBTA, first passed in 1918, was created to ensure the sustainability of populations of migratory bird species. It protects more than 1,000 bird species in the U.S. The MBTA focuses exclusively on actions that kill or directly harm protected migratory birds. The statute declares that 22 specifically listed activities regarding migratory birds are flatly unlawful. The words in the listed activities share a common theme: all of them prohibit activity intentionally directed at migratory birds. Not included anywhere in the MBTA's list of prohibited activities is the phrase “incidental take.” Read more about the comments here: https://nclalegal.org/comments-in-response-to-the-fish-and-wildlife-services-proposed-rule-regulations-governing-take-of-migratory-birds/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Adventures in Shoppers; Returning After Serving Notice of Criminal Liability

adventures serving criminals shoppers notices criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 9, 2021 37:25

Today I am tall King about returning to a store I have placed on Notice of Criminal Liability for discriminating against Me for having a medical exemption to wearing a mask. I read the Notice on the call and talk about why Notices are such a powerful Way to stop further trespass.

Magical Monday Motive A Sean Edition; Another Government Office Placed on Notice of Criminal Liability

criminals magical motive criminal liability government office

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 8, 2021 64:57

I am thing King the Title of today's Post says it all. I place another government office on Notice of Criminal Liability for Uttering Threats and Trespass Upon My Inherent rights. My Letter of response to the unreasonable performance demand made under threat of economic duress. Also tall King about the launch of My new platform and Private Membership Association, UnGuru.

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

dismissed criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 3, 2021 27:19

Case Dismissed 54-01-30 01 Criminal Liability

CRCC Spotlights – Corporate criminal liability in the UK and Germany

Legal updates | Simmons & Simmons

Play Episode Listen Later May 19, 2021 18:47

germany corporate criminal liability crcc

MDT Ep. 87: Medieval True Crime III: Death in the Countryside

Medieval Death Trip

Play Episode Listen Later May 12, 2021 54:56

We return from an unplanned semester hiatus with the third installment of our Medieval True Crime miniseries, continuing to explore the 13th-century coroner's rolls of rural Bedfordshire (plus one item from 14th-century Essex), as well as muse on why murder narratives so monopolize our mysteries and how murder was defined in medieval England. Today's Text: Gross, Charles, editor. Select Cases from the Coroners' Rolls, A.D. 1265-1413, with a Brief Account of the History of the Office of Coroner. Bernard Quarithc, 1896. Google Books. References: Green, Thomas A. "Societal Concepts of Criminal Liability for Homicide in Mediaeval England." Speculum, vol. 47, no. 4, Oct. 1972, pp. 669-694. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2856634. Hanawalt, Barbara A. "Violent Death in Fourteenth- and Early Fifteenth-Century England." Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 18, no. 3, July 1976, pp. 297-320. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/178340. Kaste, Martin. "Open Cases: Why One-Third Of Murders In America Go Unresolved." Morning Edition, National Public Radio, 30 Mar. 2015, www.npr.org/2015/03/30/395069137/open-cases-why-one-third-of-murders-in-america-go-unresolved. United States. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. "FAQ Detail: What is the probability of conviction for felony defendants?" www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?iid=403&ty=qa.

Why One Word Trump Uses Over & Over Again Supports Criminal Liability For the 1/6 Capitol Attack

donald trump politics law congress attack political legal democrats criminals capitol progressive liberal judicial one word justice department capitol attack justice matters criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 1, 2021 8:01

Donald Trump has used the word "Stop" over and over again to accomplish his nefarious ends: "stop" voting by mail, "stop" Congress from certifying the election results. Of course, Trump adds words like "fraud" and "steal", apparently believing it will somehow help shield him from criminal liability. Here's why he is wrong . . . Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Support the show (http://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Why One Word Trump Uses Over & Over Again Supports Criminal Liability For the 1/6 Capitol Attack

donald trump congress attack capitol one word justice matters criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 1, 2021 8:01

Donald Trump has used the word "Stop" over and over again to accomplish his nefarious ends: "stop" voting by mail, "stop" Congress from certifying the election results. Of course, Trump adds words like "fraud" and "steal", apparently believing it will somehow help shield him from criminal liability. Here's why he is wrong . . . Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschnerMy podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts.Follow me on:Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2Support the show (http://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner)

January 6th: A Review of Criminal Liability

The JustPod

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 21, 2021 52:13

Joe Whitley of Baker Donelson, who also served as the first General Counsel for the United States Department of Homeland Security joins us for a special episode to review the events of January 6th. We discuss voter fraud and where and with whom there is potential criminal liability from that day. Want to get involved with the Criminal Justice Section? Join us! https://www.americanbar.org/membership/join-now

criminals january 6th homeland security general counsel united states department baker donelson criminal liability

Beyond Impeachment, What About Criminal Liability

Brian Lehrer: A Daily Politics Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 13, 2021 20:50

As the House debates and votes on the second impeachment of President Trump, we talked to a legal expert about whether he could be criminally charged, and what evidence would be at play. On Today's Show:Jessica Roth, Professor of Law at Cardozo School of Law and former federal prosecutor answers legal questions related to impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

history donald trump house politics law news professor elections radio public journalism impeachment lehrer wnyc cardozo school criminal liability jessica roth

454: Dodging Criminal Liability For Erotic Roleplaying | Feedback Friday

The Jordan Harbinger Show

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 8, 2021 58:49

You're in an online community that chats about erotic roleplay (ERP), and inadvertently engaged in conversation with a couple of minors. When you discovered their age, you immediately broke off contact -- but you're still worried this could have legal repercussions. Should you be concerned? We'll tackle this and more here on the first Feedback Friday of the year! And in case you didn't already know it, Jordan Harbinger (@JordanHarbinger) and Gabriel Mizrahi (@GabeMizrahi) banter and take your comments and questions for Feedback Friday right here every week! If you want us to answer your question, register your feedback, or tell your story on one of our upcoming weekly Feedback Friday episodes, drop us a line at friday@jordanharbinger.com. Now let's dive in! Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/454

relationships entrepreneur advice motivation dating fitness lifestyle nutrition selfhelp motivational speakers erotic roleplaying erp dodging jordan harbinger jordan harbinger show feedback friday criminal liability

China lowers age of criminal liability for minors

Round Table China

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 29, 2020 52:36

China will lower the age of criminal liability for minors under specific conditions. What's behind this amendment of law? / China's 2020 in Memes / Why young Chinese embrace board games

china chinese minors lowers criminal liability

18th audio C Law

Business

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 22, 2020 46:35

Remedies against Company Civil and Criminal Liability.

remedies criminal liability

Law School 33 | Circumstances affecting Criminal Liability (JEMAA)

MNB Law School Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 26, 2020 8:19

Another episode for my study with me series. Watch it or listen to it here:

circumstances affecting law schools criminal liability

Criminal law: Scope of criminal liability - Vicarious

criminals scope criminal law vicarious criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2020 8:27

The legal principle of vicarious liability applies to hold one person liable for the actions of another when engaged in some form of joint or collective activity. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Criminal law: Scope of criminal liability - Corporate liability

corporate criminals scope criminal law criminal liability

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 7, 2020 9:31

In criminal law, corporate liability determines the extent to which a corporation as a legal person can be liable for the acts and omissions of the natural persons it employs. It is sometimes regarded as an aspect of criminal vicarious liability, as distinct from the situation in which the wording of a statutory offence specifically attaches liability to the corporation as the principal or joint principal with a human agent. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Criminal Liability for Company Managers

AC Audio

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 7, 2020 12:27

Can a compliance officer be prosecuted where the organisation that employs him or her has committed a regulatory offence? What about a health and safety manager where the organisation has breached health and safety law – can he or she be prosecuted? In this briefing, Sinéad Reilly explores the answer to these questions, with reference to a recent Supreme Court decision– DPP v TN. Disclaimer: The contents of this podcast are to assist access to information and do not constitute legal or other advice. Speciﬁc advice should be sought in relation to speciﬁc cases. If you would like more information on this topic, please contact a member of our team or your usual Arthur Cox contact.

sin supreme court criminals tn managers reilly speci dpp criminal liability

Criminal law: Scope of criminal liability - Complicity