If someone confesses that he committed a criminal acts, say killing someone, is it enough for the court to ..?
824681
Well, if that someone was under oath and was "giving himself in" I'm sure that they would accommodate the person!\n\nSeeing as how you said that there was a Court involved, they would certainly ask the Bailiff to take the person into custody in order that justice may be served.  It would be a time-consuming process of course as are any arrests but I guarantee if you are under oath and admit to a crime (especially murder) then the Court would be obligated to hold that person and begin processing the paperwork.\n\nAnybody who would testify in Court to doing a crime who didn't really commit the crime would then be charged with perjury which is punishable by whatever the State laws allow.\n\nSomeone who truthfully, under oath, admits to a crime would be believed as they swore they would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth So Help Them God.  So God if your listening, Help Them!!!\n\n..................think about it........................
245928
It can be justified if they truly believe a crime was in the process of being committed that might result in a person's life being threatened.
137981
No.  Just as you cannot prosecute someone for doing something that was legal at the time the act was committed but no longer legal, you cannot exonerate someone for breaking what was a law at the time the criminal act was committed.  Look at it this way, it's not what they did that was wrong, it was that they disobeyed what was written as law.
48337
I think it depends on the crime.  If it was premeditated and gruesome, then by all means yes; however, if it was accidental, and unplanned, i.e. like that boy who accidently killed that little girl by performing a wrestleing move on her, then no, but they would need some form of hospitalization.
139327
If you're planning on doing it - don't!  This is premeditated murder and the prosecutors will figure it out. \n\nBut if you're just wondering, or too lazy to do your criminal law homework, then it depends on the intent.  \n\nIf the guy is sober, and intentionally runs over a child, that's straight-up murder.  He will be raped by cellmates, beaten to a pulp, and get the needle in 20 years.\n\nIf the guy was only distracted - talking/arguing on the cell, looking at map, officiating fights of his own kids in the backseat, attacked by his Chihuahua, shot by Dick Cheney, etc., then we're talking about lesser degrees of murder.  Probably vehicular manslaughter and about 10 years or less.  \n\nNow, if the guy is drunk and runs over a kid, he's up for drunk driving and vehicular manslaughter.  In some states, there are special laws that make the sentence especially harsh.  This is because being drunk actually takes away the "intentional" part of the murder, but people decided that drunk driving and killing people is no less culpable.  \n\nSo...\n\n1) DON'T DO IT!\n2) Let me know if your law professor liked the answer; or \n3) Still wanna be a lawyer?
1068353
Yes it is a good Idea. If the defendent Is Not guilty -He needs to be able to tell the Jury that and denie the charges.
991992
NOPE..\nmorever it depends on your thinking.. people sometimes commit heinous crimes and inside their mind justify the act and never blame there self or conciousness.\nand there are some people who have made a small mistake spend their entire life worrying and fretting..\n\ni don't think that i have committed any serious mistake which has greatly hurt some one.. \namends can be made for all mistakes except rape and murder which are irreversible..
176795
meaning that the individuals punishment should fit the crime committed..
115819
No because it is too late.  You allowed the person to be found guilty already and is awaiting sentencing.  You can make a statement to the judge before sentence is passed down by the judge.
881658
yes if he is a bad criminal person.. but no if he is living without doing any harm to people
618336
yes. legally they get charged w murder.
611120
All crimes require intent. Murder[1] requires "intent to kill"\nThe intent is clearly lacking in this case. So even if it was an Adult he could not be convicted of murder.\nThis is at most negligent homicide[2]. I.E. a person failed to removed the pillow by negligence and let a child die.\nSo if it was an adult he would be convicted of that.\nBut a child is usually deemed not capable of negligence[3] because he cannot foresee the result of his actions. \nSo there would be no charges.
46938
The jury will look at all of the evidence against him, and will decide if he is guilty, or not guilty..If he really didn't do the crime, the jury will see that, and will declare him not guilty..Try and make sure, he has an attorney, who will present his side of the case..Good Luck..
950754
no, it would just perpetuate an injustice.  encourage that person to report to the police and tell him what matters most will be that "the truth shall set us free."
1167077
innocent to be locked up.  if someone has a propensity for criminal behavior, there is a chance they will meet justice eventually.
384033
Do you plan on commiting this crime, or have you done so already?
98503
I believe your sentence/perdition/penalty would greatly depend on a few things like the state where the crime was committed, and the dollar amount of said offense.  \n\nIt might just end up being a state charge, but it has the propensity to be a federal charge too depending on the specific details and nature of the crime.