LogFAQs > #927230520

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicTrump presented week old Dorian map altered with sharpie to include Alabama
darkknight109
09/10/19 6:08:25 AM
#83:


adjl posted...
The act was very clearly intentional. Ignorance of the law may be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but it does not change that a criminal act was committed.

It can - depends on the specifics of the crime and the jurisdiction. In some cases, ignorance of the law *is* a defence. You have to prove that a person was knowingly and willingly doing something they knew to be wrong. If someone violates the law but was not aware of it and made no attempts to hide it, they lack criminal intent - for some violations, that is sufficient to avoid prosecution.

For instance, if a drug dealer's home is being raided by the police and the dealer starts flushing all the drugs he has down the toilet, he is guilty of obstruction of justice. He is intentionally disposing of incriminating material in an attempt to conceal a crime. On the other hand, if his mother came across some of his drugs, assumed they were expired medication, and flushed them down the toilet as a means of safely getting rid of them, she would not be guilty of a crime in most cases. Even though she is conducting the exact same activity, she lacks criminal intent. Due to a lack of information, she did not realize that she was committing a crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_(criminal_law)

Now, admittedly, that example isn't ignorance of the law, just ignorance of the specifics of the situation. But it can apply to the law too - I'm familiar with examples in contract law and tax law, where if you can show that you made a good faith attempt to follow the law and your ignorance of specific requirements of the law led to a violation, it is typically sufficient to avoid prosecution, and any prosecutor who opts for charges must prove that you knew that what you were doing was a violation of the law.

I'm not a lawyer and I have no idea if it would apply in this specific case, but the old phrase "ignorance is no defence" isn't 100% true.
---
Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1