Was this Lincoln conspirator guilty? At this museum, you decide.
|
04-21-2016, 01:24 PM
Post: #4
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Was this Lincoln conspirator guilty? At this museum, you decide.
(04-21-2016 09:52 AM)John Fazio Wrote: Roger: John, I believe Laurie agrees with you that she should not have been executed, but I am going to quote from a previous post she made: "...in teaching the Lincoln conspiracy to children (and many adults), I use an analogy to make the principles of "vicarious liability" and "laws of conspiracy" better to understand. First, many don't know what the word "conspiracy" even means. The minute I use the word "gang," however, they come alive. That (unfortunately) is something they can relate to in this day and age. My analogy is the idea of a bank robbery where three members of that gang decide to rob a bank. One is the get-away driver and remains in the car while the other two enter the bank. In the course of the robbery, one of the guys shoots and kills a bank employee. Who is guilty of murder? The students are surprised to discover that, under the definition of vicarious liability, technically they all are. I then change the scenario and have the driver outside change his mind, spot a cop on the corner, and report that a bank robbery is in progress. By the time the cop gets to the bank, however, the murder has already been committed. Will a jury find the driver guilty of murder? Probably not, because he tried to stop the bank robbers by going to an authority (one must be able to stop a conspiracy, not just drop out)." My question would be...under the concept of vicarious liability, as Laurie explained it, why shouldn't she be executed? She had a window of opportunity to go to the authorities (as did Atzerodt) but did not do so. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)