Legal Question for PAC, et al.

[Katy Lied]

Not to diss PAC, but I would have specifically addressed this question to SU. He knows crap like this.

All American is a good second, but he's still a novice.

Definitely SU.

[Joe Public]

DDD's example is actually an interesting question to me, despite its lack of practical use or even possibility of happening. If someone killed the Loch Ness Monster, would it be a crime? Could a clever prosecutor find some statute by which to charge him/her? This stuff interests me, and I'm not even incarcerated. Of course, if he says it's stupid, then it's stupid, because it doesn't interest the pissy little doggie.

States have varying animal cruelty laws, some of which are fairly broad and could theoretically be used to prosecute the killing of a dinosaur or lake monster. Furthermore, the owner (if any) of such a creature may have a civil cause of action for trespass to chattels.

[Jacob]

This is a stupid thread. You cannot contract or consent to a tort or crime and it is irrelevant whether dueling has been outlawed because there are some pretty recent laws on the books that prohibit assault, battery, murder, use of deadly weapons, etc. Also, in the event of death, the State would likely be a party to the case, regardless of whether the deceased wanted to "sue" anyway.

Hope this helps.

Now onto another brain teaser....if I saw a dinosaur and killed it, would I get into trouble because there are no laws that specifically mention dinosaurs.

This is, of course, correct. And to add to the point, murder and manslaughter are well-defined statutory crimes in all states for which dueling is not an exception and consent is not a defense. No need to rely upon common law.

As for the Loch Ness Monster, well, I guess we'd have to become familiar with the laws of Scotland. But most states in the US define which animalws can be killed without a license and the LNM doesn't happen to fit the definition of a varmint.

Then again, if the Monster is killed in Lake Widemere, in England, after traveling there form Loch Ness via an underground water passage, we'd have to consult the laws of England.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/ar...indermere.html

[Babs]

Not to diss PAC, but I would have specifically addressed this question to SU. He knows crap like this.

All American is a good second, but he's still a novice.

Definitely SU.

Crap being the operative word. I don't think this is a legal question at all. I think wuap's just using a weak hypothetical in hopes of inspiring a philosophical wankery sort of discussion of the nature and history of the common law.

[TripletDaddy]

This is, of course, correct. And to add to the point, murder and manslaughter are well-defined statutory crimes in all states for which dueling is not an exception and consent is not a defense. No need to rely upon common law.

Bingo (not withstanding the common law jibba jabba that 3L was quoting....probably from James Lemon or Gordon Wood).

My boy's wicked smaht!

[LA Ute]

If someone killed the Loch Ness Monster, would it be a crime? Could a clever prosecutor find some statute by which to charge him/her? This stuff interests me, and I'm not even incarcerated.

This is not stupid, it's just a good reminder of why we have academia. People who think this way need a place to be in our society.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Not to diss PAC, but I would have specifically addressed this question to SU. He knows crap like this.

All American is a good second, but he's still a novice.

Definitely SU.

Spot on, and no offense taken. My metier lies more in the area covered by a law review article that was published during my time in law school, The Common Law Origins of the Infield Fly Rule.

[Babs]

Spot on, and no offense taken. My metier lies more in the area covered by a law review article that was published during my time in law school, The Common Law Origins of the Infield Fly Rule.

I had a prof who writes stuff like this. Last year he wrote a piece parsing the legal foundations of the 'indisputable video evidence' standard of review in college football.

[statman]

... the fact that it has been so long since any cases have relied upon that precedent would weigh against abiding by it....

I believe it's been weighed-in on as recently as 1983:

[wuapinmon]

This is not stupid, it's just a good reminder of why we have academia. People who think this way need a place to be in our society.

I'd think this way even if I weren't a professor.

[YOhio]

I'd think this way even if I weren't a professor.

You don't know that.

[wuapinmon]

You don't know that.

You're right, it is unknowable. I will restate. "I thought this way even when I wasn't yet a professor."

[LA Ute]

I'd think this way even if I weren't a professor.

That's why you need to be a professor. Otherwise you'd just be a sad misfit.

[wuapinmon]

That's why you need to be a professor. Otherwise you'd just be a sad misfit.

I know. I almost went to law school.

[LA Ute]

I know. I almost went to law school.