Andy, Mathew and Jimmys Criminal Liability - Essay Example

Criminal law Introduction Criminal law describes the groups of rules which guides various judicial powers and whose general characteristics is the potential for unique and thorough punishments imposed on those who act against them. It is usually enforced by the Government through reinforcement of judiciary as one of its arms. This arm of the government consists of the police service which keeps an eye on the public to ensure that everybody complies with the laws. Those who live against the laws are taken to courts of laws where the judges pass their criminal punishments depending on the offense. These punishments may either be execution, fines, loss of liberty or government supervision – where a person is put in the custody for a defined period of time.1 A crime is any activity which violates the law of an organization, a society or a state and each individual society or state has different ways of defining a crime. Every crime breaks a law but not every activity of breaking a law is a crime but the rule governing determines which activity is a crime and which is not. Below is an example of a case involving various crimes. Andy, Mathew and Jimmy’s criminal liability The three men originated from Australia and the crime which led to their imprisonment followed a crime which was committed in Burma. Andy‘s son Jim went missing and after investigations his father learnt that he was killed while in Burma. As a result he decided to fight the tribe of Karen against Burmese. Later he went back to prepare and get some reinforcement for the fight. The death of Jim and that of Joe who died as a result of the pistol whips from Andy were all murder cases. This is a serious crime and according to the Australian law of court, those charged with murder should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. The law courts use the records of the past related cases to rule the present and according to the rules of the court, no new law can be formulated to precede a case unless a court does not bear past records of such a case. According to the court of justice, it is injustice to pass similar cases differently .This means that Andy and his colleagues will have to face either of the punishments. Any needed more money to support his project so he decided to engage in an act of committing robberies so as make enough money. He committed a crime of involving an innocent person in the crime-his friend Mathew as his assistant during the robbery processes. The accused is also charged against physical torture, during their first robbery the criminals broke into the premises of Manager, Joe Bloggs. Mercilessly Andy drag Joe’s wife, Betty who was 7 months pregnant and tied her in one of the rooms, he then forced Joe to drive them to the supermarkets and open the safes for them. Afterwards, Any Pistol whipped Joe and left him unconscious and bleeding on the floor. This led to damages which resulted to his death. Andy also was charged against psychological torture. They broke into Joe’s home with loaded pistols and threatened Joe and Betty with them and also used them to keep them quiet as they carried on their activity. Betty was also psychologically disturbed when they left her tied and taped and left with his husband not knowing what they would do with him or her. And the worst torture Andy did on Betty is beating her husband to death. The constitution law of Australia states that there is freedom of expression; nobody should deny this freedom from anybody in any way unless the statute body sees to it that changing the rule is worthwhile. Andy taped Betty and pointed the gun towards her husband to stop them from talking or screaming. According to the constitutional laws, this is a crime and the court should also find them guilty following these laws. The law also found them guilty of breaking into somebody’s premise, stealing money from the safes of the bank which Joe was managing and replacing the number plate of the vehicle which they used for stealing withy a stolen plate. Both the Australian law and the Acts of the Commonwealth does not advocate for this. In both acts it is stated that this is a crime n the only different in the explanation of this crime is the context at which it is committed. Like his colleague, Mathew is also charged with some crimes. He sided Andy in his activity which was all about breaking the rules. His conscience tries to warn him not to accept the offer but due the pressure of his friend Andy he gave into it and all through the illegal process they were together. A third party was also involved in the crime, Jimmy Durante who had also been informed of the plan and supported them. Although he was not along with them, he offered to accommodate them after they were through with their mission. Thus he is accused of encouraging crimes. All the three men were involved in the crimes what differs is their level of participation although the law does not recognize this. Andy is the principal as he is a very influential ring leader of the group. He strategies the plan and influences the others to participate and all through he is the one giving instructions. Both Mathew and Jimmy are aiders because their roles were to assist Andy see his activity through Although Andy is confident when committing these crimes, sometimes shows some sense of sympathy, for example, after leaving Joe unconscious on the floor he pitied him together with his pregnant wife and decide to call the police to rescue them. According to the commonwealth of the Australian constitution act, the act and all laws made and agreed upon by the parliament shall be binding in the courts of law. That is they shall be used by the judges to guide them in the ruling of the cases. Andy, Mathew, and Jimmy should carefully go through the various section and acts of the constitution to ensure that they do not go against the laws hence are not prosecuted by the court of law. According to the acts they are ignorance of law since before resigning they worked in the judicial arm of government, and particularly in the army which works to implement rules to the public. Andy the ring leader of the gangs was once a sergeant in the Special Air Services so all the forms of laws ranging from the criminal to constitutional were at his finger tips. According to the Australian laws, the three criminals are charged against so many crimes and the court of law will not give general ruling but will rule each at a time, giving the expected punishment for each.2 There are other laws that Andy followed so as to decide to fight the Karen, when he learnt from a mother of his previous colleague, according to the military code Andy was grateful and so as to show some gratitude decide to fight for Karen tribe against the Burmese. Following these rules led to violation of the major laws of the state. Andy and his group should try to be a bit careful even as they consider the many rules abiding them. It is necessary to know or determine the authority with the most power over the others. The states laws should be accorded the biggest respect because they have more powers than any other authority. Some of the crimes charged against these three criminals may have simple punishments like breaking into somebody’s house but others like murdering Joe means that they will either be killed or be incapacitated although this is a crime in most of the statutes. Beating or physically harassing human beings is not allowed in most of the laws and this is applied not only in the courts but also in other institutions like schools. Each day teachers are sued because of disciplining the kids in schools. 3 The law should not ignore the killing of Andy’s son because it is also a crime which calls for action to be taken against it Conclusion Criminal laws are rules made against any crime. They are thus based on the definition of the crime and the consequences it causes, for example, the rules set against murder cases are not the same as those against stealing. A murder case may have high consequences like incapacitation or even murder through life imprisonment. Like most of the commonwealth states Australia’s laws are well formulated and structured in different authorities. For example, the constitutional laws which are formulated by the members of the parliament and the courts laws or the civil laws are formulated by the judicial arm of government especially the judges to guide them solve the cases brought in their courts. All the laws made by all these bodies are implemented by the officials of the judiciary. The police keep a close eye on the behavior of people and those who violate the defined laws are taken to the court of law and where the trials are preceded upon their offenses and judgments passed depending on the guilty found.4 Bibliography Barry J., Whitecross G. & Sawer G. (1948).An introduction to the criminal law in Australia. California: Macmillan.5 Lanham D. (2006). Criminal laws in Australia. Australia: Federation Press. Campbell G. (1988).Mental disorder and criminal law in Australia and New Zealand . California: Butterworths, Finlay, H. & Alastair, B. (1972).Family law in Australia California: Butterworths. Read More