Voodoo Case

1) Under the definition attempt, Victor is guilty for the attempt murder of his wife. Victor has a strong belief of voodoo and since he believes that it will harm his wife, it is an attempt of murder. Victor stabbed the voodoo for a purpose and that purpose was to kill his wife. His belief was by doing that act, it will have a result without doing anything else. Victor confess and even though other individuals find voodoo strange, Victor has strong belief of it which in the definition of attempt, victor is guilty.

2) Kadish will view this case as non punishable because there is no way that someone is able to be murder by voodoo and even if they did, it would be by faith. Kadish will claim that is will only matter by luck. If Victor use the voodoo to murder his wife, even though he has no control over the faith, if the wife dies Victor will get punishment.

3) Harm doctrine is the punishment gets reduce if the harm intended does not happen.  For example, attempted murder carries a lesser sentence than murder because of the fact that the attempt on a life was unsuccessful.  According to Kadish, there are two areas in which the Harm Doctrine, still works; the law of attempts, the law of culpable risk creation (Adams 397). This applies to the case because if Victor’s plan does not succeed when intended to harm, he receive less punishment.

4) According to Kardish, We still use “Harm Doctrine” today to limit the population in jail. Kadish claims that the chance depends on the luck. The one who succeed to kill the person should deserve more punishment than the person who fail to murder.

Peterman/ Prosecution

Peterman is guilty for the attempted rape of child. He has several sex objects with him, intending to rape a child. He also arrived to the woman's home with the thoughts of rapping the child and was well prepared. Though the victim was fictional, she is thought to be real in Peterman's mind. Peterman did not know that the victim is fictional that means the victim is real to Peterman which is the attempt of rape. The attempt to rape is still a crime whether Peterman was successful or not. The word attempt is defined as an act to achieve something. Peterman did act by arriving to the woman's house, he made that attempt. But attempt does not mean achieving that goal but also means act of trying . Peterman bought objects to initiate to rape of the child.  In the concept of actus reas, Peterman did show up at the woman’s house with photographs and sex toys with an intention to rape the child. Peterman could have avoid the crime by not going to the woman's house but since he went, it is an attempt of rape. His thought was to only go to the house to rape the young girl. Though it was a setup, he would have created the crime if the child did existed . In concept of mens rea, Peterman knew that it was a wrongful act. His motive was to rape the child and intent to do so as soon as he will able to get the young girl. His intention was to rape a child and would have done it if the child existed and that makes him guilty.

"Life Boat"

1) I think that the defendants is guilty of murder. Though they were protecting themselves from harm and felt that the best way to save themselves is by not letting anyone that can jeopardize the people on the boat, they still had open space open for someone else to be saved. The crew men picked the strongest people onto the boat which is wrong. They should have tried to save the pregnant woman because two lives could have been saved. It should not matter about the strength the person have but they should have saved anyone that the can save.

2) The crew is morally wrong, they did not save the people that cried for help. How can someone have the courage to push someone off the boat knowing that the people is left to die? that is morally wrong. Morals is what is you believe is right and wrong but, when it comes to situation where you have the chance to make decision on whether the person lives or dies, that is morally wrong.

3) The utilitarian philosopher would state that the crew did the right thing because they looked at the best way to survive. They would also state that the boat can only hold certain numbers of people and had to look at the best alternative. In utilitarianism morally right act is looking at the best consequences for all affects. Deontology will state that moral in life is to treat people the way you would want to be treated. The deontology  claims that it does not matter about the future consequences but rather at the present actions. Such as Kant, who believes that though they might do the right thing, it is a selfish act and being that they have no more values.