Men After Conviction Cases
When looking at the case of The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens and the punishment that the two men face after conviction is one that requires a lot of thought (Brody and Acker, 2010). These two men were faced with a difficult situation that due to their being in a position of making life threating decisions that would determine if they all lived or if they all died with the sacrifice of one saving the other three men. These two men’s fate, after their criminal conviction, should be evaluated with the circumstances of the crime of murder with the intent of the two men to survive while stuck in the middle of the ocean with no way out (Gollwitzer and Keller, 2010). When humans are left out in nature with nothing to eat or drink this starts
to lose the ability to think in the typical pattern that it would work (Annigan, 2015). This should also be taken into consideration when attempting to determine the criminal conviction of these two men after being convicted of murder. These effects to these two men could/should have led to the killing of their victim being one that was easily justifiable to the two men. This viewpoint is allowing for both punishment and treatment for the offenders in question in this case. The sentence for these two men should be one that includes a valid evaluation of all of the facts listed before it is handed down to the two convicted murders (Gollwitzer and Keller, 2010). The sentence for these two offenders after these evaluations should be one that is built around treatment for these two offenders that allow them to understand what took place and how to ensure that if they are in another hopeless situation can hopefully find other sources of food and survive the incident. These sentences that these two men received from Queen Victoria herself were justifiable giving the people a light punishment for the murder of their victim but also allowing society the right to feel that justices had been served in a manner that fits the situation that the men found themselves.
to lose the ability to think in the typical pattern that it would work (Annigan, 2015). This should also be taken into consideration when attempting to determine the criminal conviction of these two men after being convicted of murder. These effects to these two men could/should have led to the killing of their victim being one that was easily justifiable to the two men. This viewpoint is allowing for both punishment and treatment for the offenders in question in this case. The sentence for these two men should be one that includes a valid evaluation of all of the facts listed before it is handed down to the two convicted murders (Gollwitzer and Keller, 2010). The sentence for these two offenders after these evaluations should be one that is built around treatment for these two offenders that allow them to understand what took place and how to ensure that if they are in another hopeless situation can hopefully find other sources of food and survive the incident. These sentences that these two men received from Queen Victoria herself were justifiable giving the people a light punishment for the murder of their victim but also allowing society the right to feel that justices had been served in a manner that fits the situation that the men found themselves.