Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (4100)	3/21/2002 7:01:18 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

It isn't punishment in civil court, it is damages- to make the person "whole" who was injured. Obviously a tough proposition when someone is dead, but the courts do it all the time in civil cases (trying to compensate the familiy of the dead person)- even those not stemming from alleged criminal actions. Since the burden of proof is much different, and the purpose is different, I don't see the problem. If you allow weird things like the felony murder rule on the criminal side, you might as well allow law suits aimed at trying to give restitution to those poor victims, or their relatives,( the ones you have so much compassion for) on the civil side. Double jeopardy applies to the state prosecuting you, after all. It has nothing to do with civil cases. Just in case you didn't believe me without a citation: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (4100)	3/21/2002 7:21:24 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

There is criminal law, and there is civil law, and I am thinking that one ought not to be eligible to be punished twice. I'm surprised at that. I haven't been following the death penalty discussion closely, but I noticed your concern about the victim and the victim's family. The civil case is for the victim. The criminal case doesn't provide any compensation to the victim. It may provide a sense of justice, or vengeance, but no compensation. It might be more efficient if we could integrate punishment and compensation, but to deny the victim compensation out of a sense of double jeopardy doesn't seem fair to me. Karen