Question by Eric E: How are victim less crimes prosecuted without violating the constitution?
If you are charged with a victim less crime (driving without a license, possessing drugs) How do they prosecute you without violating the constitution?
You have the right to an impartial judge and impartial jury of your peers. So if it is the “STATE” VS YOU. (the state meaning the people of) and the judge is from the state and the jury is also. That would violate your rights protected by the constitution. The victim cannot be the judge and the jury and your attorney too. Waiting for some smart answers!
Best answer:
Answer by WRG
All criminal acts are the State v. The Defendant. The judge takes an oath when taking office that he will be impartial. The jury of your peers would be people from your state.
Add your own answer in the comments!
Mutt
December 21, 2011 at 11:03 pm
I’m waiting for you to tell us what part of the Constitution you feel this violates.
Jens
December 22, 2011 at 12:02 am
” So if it is the “STATE” VS YOU. (the state meaning the people of) and the judge is from the state and the jury is also. That would violate your rights protected by the constitution. ”
No it would not. The judge being from the state is not a sufficient reason why he would not be impartial. After all, from this alone there does not arise any incentive to the judge to falsely condemn or acquit you. If you disagree, then please explain what that incentive might be, and why it would be a strong one that could falsely sway the judge’s decision.
Whatever4
December 22, 2011 at 12:48 am
It helps if you read what the 6th amendment actually says, because it’s not a jury of your peers. The 6th Amendment is to prevent the State from deciding you committed a crime and just put you in jail because they said so. You get to defend yourself and confront the people who accuse you. You get to be judged by people who don’t know you, the attorneys, or the victim (if there is one).
Amendment 6: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
All crimes, whether victimless or not, are crimes against The People of the State or The People of the US, depending on whether it’s a state or federal law that is being broken. The citizens of the state voted for the members of Legislative Branch, which passed laws on behalf of the citizens of the state. The Judge is from the Judicial Branch of the Government, the prosecutors are from the Executive Branch. Because it’s divided up that way, the Judge, Jury, Laws, and Prosecutors are all different parts of the whole. The victim isn’t part of that.
So — the citizens serving on the Jury didn’t make the laws, they are called up according to law, examine the arguments of both sides, and decide the facts. The Judge doesn’t decide the fate of the accused, he makes sure the process is carried out correctly (unless the accused waives a jury trial and says that the judge can decide the case). The Prosecutor doesn’t decide the case, he/she represents the interests of all of the citizens of the state and has to prove to the Jury that a crime was committed and the accused is the one that did it. The victim isn’t part of that.
If you mug a little old lady, she’s not your judge, jury, or attorney. She’s a witness at best. If she refused to testify or if she died, it doesn’t matter. Your crime wasn’t against HER, it was against The People of the State. (Although she may have a civil case against you.) Same if you drive without a license. Your crime is against the People of the State.
jeffrey f
December 22, 2011 at 1:19 am
They are prosecuted the same as any other crimes.