In jurisprudence, an apology is a defence to criminal charges distinct from exoneration. Justification and apology are different defences in a criminal case (see justification and apology). [1] Exoneration is a related term that reduces or extinguishes a person`s debt, such as his or her obligation to pay damages to the victim of a civil tort. Apology defenses are based more on the actor than on the criminal act. While the defendant`s actions were criminal and intentional and caused some degree of harm to society, these defences may exonerate criminal culpability because the defendant is not responsible for his or her own actions for a mitigating reason. If the accused has been unintentionally drugged and intoxicates another person, his or her behaviour may be excused and exonerated. Whatever your legal problem, there is probably a lawyer who specializes specifically in your particular legal problem. Those of us who have OCD get up at thirty past zero to make sure we are never late for a court date, otherwise we risk the case being dismissed. In these smartphone days, it makes sense to call the court to alert them to your tardiness, unless you use the excuse that your cell phone battery is dead. (Please be more creative than that.) Armando is charged with burglary at Roman`s residence.
Armando decides to pursue two defenses. First, Armando claims that he was with Phil on the day and time of the robbery. This is called an alibi defense. Second, Armando asserts that due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, it is too late to prosecute him for burglary. Armando`s alibi defense is a factual defense; it is based on the fact that Armando could not have committed the burglary because he was elsewhere at the time of the burglary. Armando`s prescription defense is a legal defense because it is based on a law that limits the time the government has to prosecute Armando for burglary. 8. Last but not least, an entire website dedicated to apologies that lawyers can use in different situations, not just in court. An argument breaks out at a party, Juan is seriously injured.
Jasmin and Jerome are arrested and accused of beating Juan. Jerome claims that he did not touch Juan; Someone else beat him. Jasmine claims she didn`t hit Juan because she legally defended herself against Juan`s attack. Jerome`s claim focuses on the battery elements and asserts that these elements cannot be proven beyond doubt. Technically, Jerome cannot do anything and be acquitted unless prosecutors prove that he was the criminal actor. Jasmine`s claim of self-defense is an affirmative defense. Jasmin must do something to be acquitted: she must prove that Juan attacked her at some level of proof. Here are some excuses that will never convince a judge: 9. Here is a website dedicated to apologies made by lawyers who have a substance abuse problem. We are told time and time again that substance abuse is a big problem in our profession, and these are the reasons why lawyers do not condone violence against themselves and others. Does all this sound familiar? If an accused is legally mentally ill at the time the crime is committed, he or she cannot be convicted of mental illness.
The legal definition of mental illness is not the same as the medical definition of mental illness, and the presence of a mental disorder or abnormality alone is not sufficient to establish that a defendant is legally ill with a mental illness. [21] The mental illness defense is not permitted in some states, but those states allow a “guilty but senseless” verdict that provides for institutionalization instead of imprisonment. Most states allow a verdict of “not guilty of mental illness” (or similar wording) that also allows defendants to be institutionalized as criminally insane. So, for the sake of entertainment (and we probably can all have some these days), here are some of the ones I`ve come across recently. Lawyers, future lawyers and even a judge for good measure are the stars here, and they are not in any particular order.
