Abstract
Numerous factors shape the definition of justice, including the position that people occupy within the system of law. Detangling personal views from public standards may be a requirement when attempting to persecute lawbreakers, an act that requires a grasp on the meaning of criminal justice. The conviction of Dale Park for his brother’s death, despite the agreement between them, maybe considered just, as it constitutes all the elements of a crime as defined by USA laws. However, the length of his sentence in a high-security prison remains the will of his persecutor, which is demonstrative of the complicated nature of justice. Reassessing his case as per Georgia laws makes a shorter sentence permissible and favorable, considering possible mitigating factors.
Introduction
The existing world encompasses a wide range of opinions, many of them differing from each other because each person has a unique set of experiences shaping their worldview. Therefore, recognizing an interconnection between the personal and social definitions of justice may permit creating a wholesome understanding of the concept. Serving justice, as a servant of the law, relies on recognizing the details and elements that make each crime unique and, therefore, deserving of distinct penalization that relies on facts and evidence.
Definition of Justice
Justice may sound like a universally applicable idea, but people have their own perception of what the concept means. I may define it as the support of morally and ethically good actions and, conversely, the punishment of unacceptable behavior, but the state definition of justice relies on a broader rather than personal definition. The understanding of what is a positive or negative action requires codification that relies on both an individual’s and society’s understanding of the ultimate good (Kappeler & Potter, 2018). Therefore, justice may be defined as the lawful reflection of public moral agreement (Braswell, 2017). Separating the official definition from the possibly differing personal understanding, thus, becomes an essential step when attempting to prosecute offenders of the law.
Dale and Mike Park jointly agreed to the death of one of them to avoid possible future suffering due to a severe medical condition. The circumstances of the two brothers do not adhere to the legal definition of assisted suicide, but instead meet the requirements of manslaughter, of which the surviving brother was convicted (“Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-2,” 2019; “Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-5,” 2019). Therefore, it may seem that the justice system conducted itself appropriately and adhering to the law while overstepping possible ethical and moral aspects of the incident.
Charges and Elements of Crime
State Standard
The state standards of Georgia that are relevant to crimes and offenses against the person are explicit regarding the numerous definitions of homicide. Murder may not pose a sufficient case due to Dale’s panicked state, brought about by his brother’s sickness and survival despite the ingestion of tranquilizers (“Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-1,” 2019). Instead, voluntary manslaughter “as the result of a sudden, violent, and irresistible passion” seems to be the appropriate charge that may be filed against Dale Park (“Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-2,” 2019, para. 1)—recognizing the details of the crime permits rejecting the possibility of accusing the surviving Park brother of malicious aforethought.
Elements of Crime
To adequately support the filing of a manslaughter case rather than a murder one, as a valid choice, one should consider the inherent features of the crime. Conviction requires the presence of criminal act, intent, and their consequent correlation to each other (Neubauer & Fradella, 2017). When shooting his brother with the intention to end his life, Dale acted out of panic, thus, satisfying the criteria for voluntary manslaughter.
First Degree Murder
It may be required to refute any possibility of convicting Dale for first-degree murder to bring about the necessary justice per his actions. Three elements of this kind of crime may be highlighted, which are the presence of the act of unlawful killing, carried out with malicious forethought against another human being (“Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-1,” 2019). Therefore, Dale may not be charged with first-degree murder because he had not carried out a prepared plan, which changes the constituent circumstances of the crime, making filing a manslaughter case more appropriate instead.
Sentencing Decisions
As per the case, Dale was sentenced to five years in a maximum-security prison, which is cited to be appropriate retribution. However, contesting the justness of this type of punishment may be possible due to its harsh nature. Considering Georgia’s state law, a voluntary manslaughter sentence may range from one to twenty years, with no specification of the type of prison security level (“Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-2,” 2019). Therefore, it may be implied that while Dale was justly accused, the length of his sentence is not reflective of his crime and guilty plea.
The predicament of the prosecutor should be evident in this case, as it seems to be representative of an ethical dilemma, where no choice is faultless. However, recognizing that one of the functions of an investigator is to “negotiate guilty pleas in exchange for reduced charges,” Dale’s sentence could have been reduced (Kania, 2017, p. 147). Additionally, the note signed together by the brothers could have acted as a mitigating factor when deciding upon punishment and reduced the possible ethical qualms of the prosecutor.
Conclusion
An essential prerequisite of justice is the existence of a law, the adherence to which becomes vital in society. Therefore, the presented situation retains its position not only as a scenario necessary to understand justice’s role but also a case that is demonstrative of the part of ethics within the law. While a personal understanding of ethics may have motivated the actions of the Park brothers, justice requires that rules created to benefit the public remain unbroken.
References
Braswell, M. C. (2017). Ethics, crime, and justice: An introductory note to students. In M. C. Braswell, B. R. McCarthy, & B. J. McCarthy (Eds.), Justice, crime, and ethics (9th ed., pp. 3-9). New York, NY: Routledge.
Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-1. (2019). Web.
Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-2. (2019). Web.
Georgia code title 16. Crimes and offenses 16-5-5. (2019). Web.
Kania, R. R. E. (2017). Ethical challenges for prosecutors. In M. C. Braswell, B. R. McCarthy, & B. J. McCarthy (Eds.), Justice, crime, and ethics (9th ed., pp. 147-169). New York, NY: Routledge.
Kappeler, V. E., & Potter, G. W. (2018). The mythology of crime and criminal justice (5th ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2017). America’s courts and the criminal justice system (13th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage.