Spelunking -- Phil/Pol 129A
Fundamental Questions of the Course to Evaluate with this: What is law? And what is its relationship to state commands and/or morality?
Statute Letter: Whoever shall wilfully take the life of another shall be punished by death?
Question raised by Foster and debated by Cheif Justic Tettingham: Is Killing in Self Defense a willful act. Answer: No; Did the defendants in this case take Whetmore’s life willfully: Yes
Moral Ideas engrained into the law — Jury Nullification, and the Double Jeopardy 8th Amendment Standard that would not allow these men to be retried should they be found innocent nad allows a jury of peers to find the defendants not guilty even if their acts were against the law. —- The Jury issued a special verdict that if the Men shall be found guilty based on the facts then the defendents shall be found guilty
As well as the Executive Pardon which is discussed here as a potential remidy
On the Question of should the law provide a moral basis, I refer to John Winthrop;
It is clearely agreed, by all, that the care of safety and wellfare was the original cause or occasion of common weales and of many familyes subjecting themselves to rulers and laws;
Foster, J Argument One “Law of Nature” :
‘Latin means — when the reason for the law ceases, the law itself also ceases
I tend to disagree with this on the basis that the laws are made for cohabitation rather than coexistance. In this instance, the men continued to be together, therefore, they continued cohabitaitng in a place under the jurisdiction oft he law so therefore were subject to it
— Talking Point; Rhode Island continues to have laws governing defamation of the dead, see R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-7.1-1
However on the second point, I tend to agree. Laws were created on the basis that reasonable men would continue to agree to them and are created on the basis of a social contract. Also, in this case Whetmore withdrew from this social contract. However, in this case 12 reasonable men decided against determining a not guilty verdit by way of a special verdict
On a moral basis, Foster is correct in pointing out that 10 men died for five, so it should be fine that one man died for four. However, with the exception of gross. negligence, from a legal perspective no statutes seem to have been broken that we are aware of with the death of those 10 men. But with the death of the one man, statues of murder were broken
Spirit vs. Letter:
The court has many times applied the spirit of the law rather than the letter. Thereby acting outside of the statutes themselves. Therefore, in this case it should exercise the same juris prudence and issue a similar ruling based on the letter of the law. However, in the 1st case, no jury of reasonable men decided that the parking ticket was valid, and in the 2nd case, when decided by juries, a jury of reasonable men decides to dismiss the case.
The division between purpose and letter continues to exist, with judicial activism vs. judicial conservatism today. Our laws do serve a purpose and applying the law in understanding of that purpose is important. However, various interpreatations as to the purpose of the law can lead to significant judicial overreach into the legislative branch
Listed Poteintial Objectives of the law:
Deterrence of crime
Instinctive human demand for retribution
Rehabilitation of the wrongdoer
— Chief justice makes the argument that law may have many purposes and their purposes may be disputed
— Argues that even sill the guilt of murder could’ve acted as a deterrance for a certain period of time in this case
—-Chief Justice withdraws from the case
— J. Keen
His job is to abide by what the law says and although it may gop against what he would like to do. The law itself requires the conviction
There has been a civil war about interprreting for purpose rather than for the letter of the law between the executive, legislative, and judicial
Brings back up the multiple purpose idea