Nathan(s) Burney has embarked on an ambitious project, but he’s clearly up to the task. He calls it The Criminal Lawyer’s Guide to Criminal Law.
It starts with The Crime, and works its way forward.
Read it all. Nathan(s) completed the first five sections thus far, with plenty more to go. This may well prove to be the most exceptional thing ever created in the blawgosphere, and the one thing that will outlast all of us.
It is truly an amazing piece of work. It’s well written, incredibly well-drawn, accurate, funny, and brutally accurate. If you read nothing else, read this.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I love it! Where was he when I was in law school struggling through criminal law? (Oh, wait. Kindergarten. How embarrassing.) Nonetheless, the kid has done a great job with this. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
I used to think Nathan was an annoying member of the criminal law blawgosphere. I hated everything he wrote. Mainly because it was over my head and hard to comprehend. He’s grown on me, like a fungus. I kind of have a man-crush on him now.
I wonder if he’s going to bother explaining the difference between malum in se and malum prohibitum. Not that it plays a major role in crime & punishment anymore…
Wow, thanks for the kind words, I’m honored!
Does this mean you’re going to send him a pie?
I doubt Nathan(s) will see it as a bother.
Mmm… pie.
I have to disagree with Nathan. The real purpose of the criminal legal system is to protect the criminal from the victims or their friends and family. Without this, the victims would be free to take revenge on anyone they chose and in any way they wished. And, of course, the cycle of violence would continue.
In place like Bosnia, Serbia and Albania we see the awful results of such violence. Google for (Blood feuds keep hundreds of children from school in Albania) as one example. And one from Iraq: “On January 15, 2007, while playing outside his Baghdad home, Youssif was approached by masked men who proceeded to pour gasoline on him, set him on fire, and flee, leaving then 5-year-old Youssif to burn.” (There are certainly examples of revenge murders and arsons in the USA as well).
So that’s the real purpose of the criminal legal system: first, to correctly identify the persons to whom the guilt properly attaches, and second, to mete out punishment in a more reasoned and proportional way. The public doesn’t always concur in this which makes the job of a defense lawyer very difficult.
I see you’ve got your tin foil hat on today.
“cheating on your boyfriend might be wrong, but its not a crime”
Not in Virginia!
Yes, our lovely General Assembly has seen fit to keep 18.2-344 of the Virginia Code which makes fornication illegal on the books. As for those other activities which are totally not sex but that a young woman might engage in while cheating on her boyfriend, 18.2-361 not only makes them illegal, but makes them a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and registration on the sex offender registry.
And before you say Texas v. Lawrence, never underestimate the desire of the Virginia General Assembly, Virginia prosecutors, and Virginia courts to find ways to continue to prosecute male homosexuals. See, Signson v. Commonwealth, 621 S.E.2d 682 (Va. App. 2005) (engaging in sodomy in private may be okay, but asking an undercover cop about it in public is illegal), MacDonald v. Commonwealth, 630 S.E.2d 754 (Va. App. 2006) (a rare prosecution of a heterosexual, holding here was that children aged 16 and 17 do not have the right to engage in private acts of sodomy, so adults who do so can be prosecuted), Tjan v. Commonwealth, 621 S.E. 2d 669 (Va. App. 2005) (holding that yes this law is almost exclusively used to send undercover cops to cruise homosexual pick up areas and bust male homosexuals, but the law itself is neutral, so no equal protection violations even though the law is being pretty clearly enforced in a discriminatory manner as anyone who has ever been to a typical college keg party knows that you could arrest half of the people there for talking about having oral sex in public).
Cool story, bro-ette.
Then show me where the error in my analysis lies.
You have no analysis. You’ve made a normative judgment (that you favor an outlier effect, and therefore decided to claim that it’s the “real” purpose) and used inductive reasoning to support it. It’s the old blind man and the elephant joke. Nothing more.
In some instances, does the criminal justice system serve to protect the criminal from the friends and family of the victim. Sure. Is that it’s purpose. No.
It’s an interesting narrative, as post-hoc explanations usually are. But can it explain how the leopard got its spots?
It’s got nothing to do with post-hoc explanations. It’s what the law is, regardless of whether that’s what you think it should be.
See what people want to do to Casey Anthony, an accused who was protected by the ‘system’ and who was, in fact, innocent and thus deserving of such protection.
Outlier? You couldn’t be more wrong. Observe your fellow citizens.
Well, you got me there. No case is more garden variety than Casey Anthony.