Write 5-6 Sentences For Your Response: Give Your Thoughts/Comments for following information Researching old criminal cases after studying our text give new perspective to circumstances and judgments. For instance, in the Betty Broderick case, Elizabeth Bisceglia (Broderick) was convicted of 2nd degree murder after killing her ex-husband and new wife. Some of the context our reading has given me is a greater understanding of the terminology and the processes by which cases are tired. It's not a simple as getting arrested and going to cout. The picture is now much bigger in that evidence had to be collected within legal guidelines before a warrant for her arrest was issued. In addition, it did not require an individual who suffered harm to bring the case to court, rather the federal courts had jurisdiction and used their virtually unlimited resources to make a case against her. In determining her guilt a jury had to determine to what degree (1st, 2nd, etc) she was guilty and the level of pain suffered by the victims. One thing that I am not finding is evidence that Betty was later tried in civil cout by individuals who were harmed or suffered a loss because of her actions. Robber vs. White Collar Crime - Robbery is a violent crime, causing others to suffer harm or death. The sense that individual lives were being threatened generally brings harsher punishments in court. If the crime was committed with a weapon it could additionally classify as aggravated assault which may even have greater penalties and be additionally prosecuted in a civil court, up to 20 years. White collar fraud, like that seen in the Enron situation is a non-violent crime for personal or business advantage. Hiding loses in other small projects and off the books companies, and using falsified projected income rather than actual income do not threaten an individual's safety, nor were the crimes committed with intent to cause harm to an individual. In this case executives were held personally liable for conspiracy, insider trading and securities fraud (including wire fraud) with the harshest being for CEO Jeffery Skilling who received 10 years in prison and a $42 million restitution. Is Torture ever justified? Not in my opinion. We as American citizens have a duty to abide the laws of our nation. We are told that murder and torture are illegal acts, cited as cruel and inhumane acts. We are also held to a moral standard that tells not to act as other people do, but rather, to do what is right. Cannibalism for Survival; Right or Wrong - The video that presented on cannibalism in the life boat is a sad story. It's somewhat easy to see both sides of the story. However, from a legal standpoint there is only one correct answer. The boat crew acted immorally and committed murder which is the most egregious criminal act, and holds strict liability on the state and federal levels. I do agree with some of the class when they mention that circumstances may have been different if the cabin boy gave consent. I would still argue that most states still oppose assisted suicide and find it a criminal act. If the boy gave consent, perhaps because he was suffering from starvation and salt intoxication, perhaps the punishment may be reduced. On the flip side, if the boat crew had waited until the cabin boy died of natural causes then the argument for murder would not exist. While it still seems immoral to eat a fallen comrade, the consequences would have been much less, both emotionally and physically