question 1. Guidelines: Your response to this post should be a minimum of 300 words.

When addressing a moral dilemma, remember the following five rules:

1. Identify the facts.

2. Identify relevant values and concepts.

3. Identify all possible dilemmas for each party involved.

4. Decide what is the most immediate moral or ethical issue facing the individual.

5. Resolve the ethical or moral dilemma by using an ethical system or some other means of decision making.

DILEMMA:

You are a federal agent and have been investigating a major drug ring for a long time. One of your informants is fairly highly placed within this ring and has been providing you with good information. You were able to "turn" him because he faces a murder charge: there is probable cause that he shot and killed a coworker during an agreement about five years ago, before he became involved in the drug ring. You have been holding the murder charge over his head to get him to cooperate and have been able, with the help of the U.S. District Attorney's office, to keep the local prosecutor from filing charges and arresting him. The local prosecutor is upset because the family wants some resolution in the case. You believe that the information he is able to provide you will result in charges of major drug sales and racketeering against several of the top smugglers, putting a dent in the drug trade for your region. At the same time, you understand that you are constantly risking the possibility that he may escape prosecution by leaving the country and that you are blocking the justice that the family of the murdered victim deserves. What would you do?

Question2. Guidelines Your response to this post should be a minimum of 300 words

When addressing a moral dilemma, remember the following five rules:

1. Identify the facts.

2. Identify relevant values and concepts.

3. Identify all possible dilemmas for each party involved.

4. Decide what is the most immediate moral or ethical issue facing the individual.

5. Resolve the ethical or moral dilemma by using an ethical system or some other means of decision making.

DILEMMA:

You are a police officer testifying in a drug case. You have already testified that you engaged in a buy-bust operation, and the defendant was identified by an undercover officer as the one who sold him a small quantity of drugs. You testified that you chased the suspect down an alley and apprehended him. Immediately before you caught him he threw down a number of glassine envelopes filled with what turned out to be cocaine. The prosecutor finished his direct examination, and now the defense attorney has begun cross-examining you. He asked if you had the suspect in your sight the entire time between when you identified him as the one who sold to the undercover officer and when you put the handcuffs on him. Your arrest report didn't mention it, but for a couple of seconds you slipped as you went around the corner of the alley and fell down. During that short time, the suspect had proceeded a considerable distance down the alley.

You do not think there was anyone else around, and you are as sure as you possibly can be that it was your suspect who dropped the bags, but you know that if you testify to this incident truthfully, the defense attorney might be able to argue successfully that the bags were not dropped by the suspect and get him acquitted of the much more serious charge of possession with intent to sell. What should you do?