Crime and Terrorism - Assignment Example

Crime and Terrorism 1. Discuss the definition of Terrorism given in the class notes. Give example of 1, a typical terrorist act, 2, a conventional crime looks like a terrorist act, and a terrorist act that looks like a conventional crime. Terrorism can be defined as the use of threatening or actual violence in pursuit of political goals, those involved in terrorism term themselves as freedom fighters and a good example is Jihad, the source of their revenue to finance terrorism include drug trafficking. Terrorism according to Paul Johnson has three elements: Individuals engaged in terrorism believe that their goals are the most important and therefore guided by this principle they plan to achieve their goals and reject all other ways to achieve their goals, Terrorism will always run counter to democratic institution and that Civil freedom which is a characteristic of democratic nation makes a nation vulnerable to terrorism. A typical terrorist attack A good example is the September 11 of the year 2001 that involved the destroying of the world trade centre in the USA. A convectional crime that looks like a terrorist attack A convectional crime is not a terrorist attach and its main objective is to produce shock and its main purpose is to weaken or destroy the enemy. A good example is the guerrilla warfare that uses violence to achieve its goals. A terrorist attach that looks like a convectional crime A terrorist attach that may look like a conventional crime is kidnapping; a person may be kidnapped by terrorists in order for them to finance their operations. 2. Discuss the differences between an International Crime and a Transnational Crime. Give one example for each and the reason of such classification. How do countries in the world cope with each type of crimes respectively? International crimes are crimes against international law, against humanity, against peace and war crimes. They are classified as international crimes due to fact that the formation of the laws for prosecution involves treaties and convections. Crimes as genocide are also referred to as international crimes; a good example is the case of Iraq where now Sadam is facing prosecution in his own country for crimes related to genocide. He was arrested by the US government but now the trial is being held in his own country. We can therefore conclude that prosecution of this crimes are made in the offenders own country. A transnational crime is a crime associated with smuggling, drug trafficking, arms trafficking and human trafficking. They are classified as transnational laws because prosecution is carried out according to the law of the country in which the arrest is made. A good example of this are cases associated with cocaine and heroin captured in airports before entering the country, victims are prosecuted in the country in which they are arrested. 3. Discuss and explain the four general characteristics of Substantive Criminal how are these characteristics reflected in the criminal codes in the U.S.? The four characteristics of substantive law are as follows: Substantive law is the written law that govern rights and obligations of the people subjected to it, this means that this criminal law is guided by set law and regulations for prosecuting criminals and also has written rights of the people. It also defines the legal relationship of people with others and also between them and the state; this means that the laws are set in such a way that they define relationships between individuals. They are in contrast to procedural law that comprises the rules determined by the court during civil and criminal proceedings. Substantive law also defines crime and also the punishment associated with various criminal acts, they define civil rights and responsibility in civil law. In the US substantive law is evident in that the process begins with a complainant who makes an accusation; the investigation is carried out by the police and an indictment is filed into a court, if the offence is classified as a felony the constitution of the US requires that the case be referred to a grand jury. In the US the interest of the state is represented by the prosecuting attorney while that of the offenders interests are represented by the defense attorney, the sixth amendment of the constitution guarantees the criminal the right for a speedy and public trial, also the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations. The criminal statutes of the US spell out all circumstances which constitute a crime which is known as elements of the offence and unless all this elements are proven by the prosecuting authority the accused is not guilty. 4. How does the Common Legal Tradition embrace Custom as the foundation of its legal system? The legal tradition is based on the principle of deciding cases by reference to previous judicial decisions rather than written statutes drafted by the legislative system. A number of judicial decisions accumulate on a particular kind of dispute and this become a guideline for judges’ decision on similar cases. Judicial decisions were written in the past and they act as guidelines to today’s decisions by judges, the collection of these laws started in the 19th century where courts started to publish their judgments unlike in the past where publications were made by private party’s example Sir Edward Coke published in 1628. Today it is the decision of the court that is published rather than the courts trial proceedings. Therefore the common law tradition sets a dynamic for change because a judge may establish a new rule for decision making, this new rules may be used by other judges in other cases and therefore bring change to the law. 5. What are the differences between the Inquisitorial and Adversarial trial structure? Why is the inquisitorial structure more frequently used in civil legal tradition while the adversarial structure more frequently used in common legal tradition? The inquisitorial system is a legal system in which the court is actively involved in determining the outcome of a case while in the adversarial system the role of the court is that of an impartial referee between parties. Another difference is seen where there is a situation that the victim admits committing a crime, in the adversarial system there are usually no more proceedings and the court will proceed by sentencing, on the other hand in an inquisitorial system if the defendant admits committing a crime the hearing will continue and it is only recorded as a fact. Rules of hearsay are stricter in the adversarial system than the inquisitorial system, In the adversarial system the rule of silence as a way of defense is limited unlike the inquisitorial system, the court will allow cross examination if a defendant fails to answer a question. In the adversarial system lawyers are able to uncover the truth and produce evidence in front of the judge unlike the inquisitorial system. The adversarial system relies on the skills of the advocates representing the interests of their parties; therefore it is more frequently used in the common legal tradition, The inquisitorial system usually has a judge or many judges who work together in investigating a case brought before them. The inquisitorial system is used in the civil legal tradition because disputes are determined by a hierarchy of courts and they are more implementing on the freedom of contract, the adversarial system uses the common legal tradition in that cases are determined by the same court. References: Bruce H (1998) Inside Terrorism, Columbia University Press, New York Fletcher P (1998) Basic Concepts of Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford Strick A (1977) Injustice for All, Putnam and Sons Publishers, New York Read More