Moral Dilemna Assignment (help me find this guy to be innocent!)

[delmarco]

"So you land on an island there you find a group of 10 French tourists blind folded and lined up against a wall. You meet a pirate who has a group of armed men with him guarding the tourists.
Seeing that you just washed up along shore and that you are not French he befriends you and invites you for breakfast.

Whiles eating he tells you the situation, the french government has killed some of his friends during a recent war and he is getting revenge. But he was going to change his mind and spare them until you, an American Journalist showed up. He realizes that he cannot harm you and must let you go.

But he realizes that you will inevitably report him and he is afraid that the American Government will get involved and punish him. He tells you this.

However, you still beg him not to kill them...and say they are after all mostly women and children.

He looks at them and then tells you he used to be a lawyer and realizes that he can still get his revenge and not be responsible.
These are his conditions. He will spare the group on one condition...that you kill one of them.

If you do not do so, then he will kill all of them because of your decision. And it will be your fault that they all died...and not his?

Using what you learned so far of the American Legal system what would you legally advise the journalist to do since his actions have consequences that will involve his implication either way in the death of innocent tourists? Give courtroom examples of what legal reponsibilities will be called to question in a court of law."

I got to write up no less than 10 pages on this by noon tommorrow for Constitution Law pt1 class. What would you do as the journalist? either way I see that he is guilty...but our paper gotta prove that whatever he does he is innocent. :

I've also been told that he cannot walk away from the scene of the crime or act like he has not been there...that argument is an automatic F.

How can we prove he is innocent :


How did Johnny Cochran do this, twice?

[Linds]

Ok, I know absolutely nothing about law but my first thought was that if he does not kill one of them and the pirate kills them all, then the journalist did not physically harm anyone nor did he force anyone to harm them. Although, now that I think about it, I guess he is just as guilty because he did nothing to stop it? Yeah, nevermind, I'm no help. Sorry!

[xsperf]

ahah id actually let him kill them all, because it takes the burden off of you, and since he is a lawyer, he can probably claim that you killed one of them and that he did absolutely nothing to them(those dirty bastards them lyin pigs!!) ahhaha jk delmarco

[Spieluhr]

kill himself?

He should not kill the one tourist. Therefore he would not have any blood on his hands. However, some may blame him for the deaths of the others because he wouldn't end one of their lives. The tourist can refuse to kill anyone but still beg, bargain, and plee that the pirate does not do anything to the tourists. In doing so the accused would be completing his requirement to help those around him, despite the outcome.

[BMWLotAttendant]

I'm taking International Business 333 right now, and BLAW next semester.

But to me, as a Business Major, you are on an Island...and the rules and regulations of that Island pertain to you. You do as he says and shoot 1 person to save the rest. You are NOT under US governemental Law. So therefore you can freely get away with shooting 1 person to save the rest.

If you don't comply, then he'll end up shooting all of them. It would be your best interest to save as much as you can. Duh!

Examples...I've learned in International laws. Mexico. When doing business in Mexico, AFTER work if you are invited to go to the Strip Club, and it is AGAINST your morals and standards. You WILL do as they say and GO with them regardless....otherwise they will be VERY Offended, and will not buy or have anything to do with your company. Which will make you look bad and your company whom you are representing.

So yeah, I say shoot 1 because you are NOT under US Law.

[RealBmw 02]

Kill the pirate??

that way he would be saving all of the innocent lives and would be getting rid of a bad life (if there is such a thing).

-OR- who gives a fuck about the french, so just kill them all and call if a day!!!

JK about the french


or am i¿

[BMWLotAttendant]

Obviously, O.J. Simpson.

"One week into the Simpson trial in February of 1995, Time reported that Cochran had "unveiled an unexpectedly strong defense." With his engaging manner and sincerity, Cochran sought to poke holes in the case against Simpson as presented by district attorneys Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. Piece by piece, he challenged the evidence, paying special attention to the racist attitudes of one of the investigating officers, Mark Fuhrman.

Cochran was effective—and controversial—in his closing arguments on Simpson's behalf. He claimed his client had been framed by a racist police officer, and that if such injustice were allowed to persist, it could lead to genocide as practiced by Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler. Speaking to the jury, Cochran concluded: "If you don't speak out, if you don't stand up, if you don't do what's right, this kind of conduct will continue on forever." After deliberating only four hours, the mostly black jury found Simpson not guilty on all counts.

Observers called Cochran's remarks the "race card," and some castigated the attorney for proceeding in this manner. Cochran offered no apologies for his strategy, claiming that his scenario represented the truth as he saw it. "I think race plays a part of everything in America, let alone this trial," he maintained in a Newsweek interview. "That's one of the problems in America. "

And

"Returning to private practice in 1983, Cochran established himself as "the best in the West," to quote Ebony magazine. One of his first major victories occurred in the case of Ron Settles, a college football player who police said had hanged himself in a jail cell after having been picked up for speeding. On the behalf of Settles' family, Cochran demanded that the athlete's body be exhumed and examined. A coroner determined that Settles had been strangled by a police choke hold. A pre-trial settlement brought the grieving family $760,000."

[delmarco]

okay...all answers are making good sense...
BMWlot...true in an American Court I can argue that he acted under juridistion of a foriegn country...but then again the assignment doesn't say where the island is seeing as how the french are tourists there and the "American" journalists are not. I also purposely does not state the nationality of the pirate...

heck the island could even be Manhattan from the way it's written...so that may not be it...

Spielur...interesting but by him killing himself i get an F...seeing as how I cannot write 10 pages about proving the innocence of a guy killing who committed suicide unless it's really good fiction.

Actually, I just got an email from someone in my study group...he said that both awnsers are correct and you can argue either way for his innocence and win the case.


I was origionally going with this idea: he kills one...and then I argue for him in court using the survivors as key witnesses to the act of bravery that he did to save them all....unless the person he kills is closely related to one or all of the survivors. Then I'm screwed...

If you do it the other way it's probably cleaner to argue..no survivors in court, just probably the Pirates (who must tell the truth BTW) and the french government. I think I'll do it this way...i think it seems cleaner that the pirate kills everyone.

Shit its 2am...

thanks guys...gotta start this...
i'll check it for more ideas as i'm writting.

[nick_318is]

hey i have an idea from my general business law class.

It involves contracts with the Pirate. Technically you could say that you have a verbal contract with him. But the contract was out of Duress, there was an improper threat, and you would have no reasonable choice but to enter the contract. Under those conditions you might be able to get away with killing one of the french tourists. You could also say there was unfair persuasion, that you were outnumbered by the pirates and they eliminated access to advice and that the contract terms were unfair and that a reasonable person would not agree to.

Those are my 2 ideas from what I have learned in my General Business Law class so far this semester. Good luck Del.

[projal147]

^^ this is true, but some how you would have to prove duress...

"if it doesn't fit you must aquit."

good luck man

I had a law class a few semesters ago, but on contract law. but I agree with nick, maybe take the contract angle...

[donald1476]

Use the chewbacca defense.

Originally Posted by Johnny Cochran

"Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, Chef's attorney would
certainly want you to believe that his client wrote "Stinky Britches"
10 years ago. And they make a good case. Hell I almost felt pity
myself. But ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one
final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is
Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kishik, but Chewbacca
lives on the planet Endor. Now think about that. That does not make
sense.

Why would a wookie, an 8-foot-tall wookie want to live on Endor with a
bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more
importantly, you have to ask yourself; what does this have to do with
this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen it has nothing to do with
this case.



It does not make sense. Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending
a major record company and I'm talking about Chewbacca. Does that make
sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense, none of this
makes sense! And so you have to remember. When you're in that jury
room deliberating and conjugating the emancipation proclamation, does
it make sense? No. Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does
not make sense. If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit. The
defense rests!

You must now decide whether or not to reverse the decision for my
client chef. I know he seems guilty but ladies and gentlemen. This is
Chewbacca. Now think about that for one minute. That does not make
sense. Why am I talking about Chewbacca when a mans life is on the
line. Why? I'll tell you why. I don't know. It doesn't make sense. If
Chewbacca does not make sense you must acquit. Here look at the
monkey, look at the silly monkey.

[Linds]

hahaha, that's hysterical!

[zeaq328i]

I remember taking the Business Law examination for the first time. I can’t even answer those 5 questions. So I BS on that paper. I score a “D” which is not up to standard for the school. I have to retake it again for a second time. Worst I score an “E”. I have to retake it again for a third time. Luckily I pass the exam. I score a “C” which is enough for me. I hate that subject.

[Linds]

Wait, you can score an "E"?

[zeaq328i]

Yes , I wrote just 5 lines on a 20marks question. There are 5 questions. Each questions caries 20 marks which have to be in essay form. But I just wrote only few lines on each question because I’ve learn the wrong syllabus.

That E grade ( 0%-20%)
D (20%-40)
C (40%-60%)

:

I’m doing quiet well on other subject except for this Business law.