Poll: Moral Dilemma...

[pppppppppppppppppp]

Hey guys, just had a question me and a friend were arguing about:

A man commits murder without a doubt, but he has no memory of the attack, the person he attacked, or any motive behind the attack. A brain scan confirms he has (convenient, Soap Opera-esque) amnesia and will never remember what happened.

My question is should you convict him of the crime he doesn't remember doing?

 

[Jedoro]

Charge him. He still committed it, and if any kind of amnesia becomes an excuse, every kind will given enough time.

 

[Syphous]

Obviously he has the capability for murder, and there needs to be justice.

Also, wasn't there a thread just like this one like a week ago?

 

[Baneat]

To what extent is the amnesia?

 

[WinkyTheGreat]

This kind of reminds me of the movie Dark City (only kind of in reverse). I would say charge him with murder, or at the very least, manslaughter. He clearly has the capability and there's always a chance he would do it again.

 

[foolish snails]

I would have to charge him. If he did it once, there's always the chance that he will do it again, just because of his personality.
Also, it's slightly like the whole "i did something bad but it was because I was drugged up/drunk"

 

[jumjalalabash]

Person is still dead because of him regardless of memory. Best case scenario for him they give involuntary manslaughter or something. To just let a murderer with possible mental illness loose is just silly.

 

[bladecuttersedge]

Well, one could also argue the same of a person with multiple personalities.
Even if the 'other personality' commits the crime you can still be charged and sent to trial.

I would vote to charge him and let a jury of his peers hear the evidence and deliver a decision.

Edit: Welcome to the escapist btw

 

[Akytalusia]

he's dysfunctional. that's all there is to it. if it's either in his nature to lose control of his sensibilities, or if he never had such sensibilities in the first place, amnesia isn't going to change that. he's allready publicised his dysfunction, so appropriate measures should be taken to ensure he doesn't cause any more harm.

 

[NellNell]

I've seen this before.. like last week someone asked the same question.

I'd say give him something less than murder, but still something. Community service. Problem solved.

 

[bombadilillo]

This is a similar argument to a determinism logical progression. If everything is just brain chemical reactions in conjunction with environmental forces then are people culpable for their actions? When you think about it, doesn't matter. They are a danger and must be removed from society. Their knowledge doesn't matter in this case.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

To what extent is the amnesia?

The only thing he doesn't remember is the murder, the person he murdered, or any interaction having to do the the person he murdered.

Also, I forgot to add that he checks out clean psychologically and seems like a regular person.

 

[Gigano]

Still the same man, still the same punishment.

Hardly any kind of dilemma. So long as it's still the same person, then that person is clearly accountable for the criminal actions which sprung from its defective personality. It's not like drunk drivers who get in a car crash generally remember the accidents they caused with vivid clarity, but who'd ever say that meant they should get off the hook?

Now if his entire mind and personality had been altered to the point of no longer being similar to the one he had while committing the crime, then we'd talk dilemma. But barring instances of severe brain damage that's for all practical purposes not particularly relevant.

 

[CrystalShadow]

This is a similar argument to a determinism logical progression. If everything is just brain chemical reactions in conjunction with environmental forces then are people culpable for their actions? When you think about it, doesn't matter. They are a danger and must be removed from society. Their knowledge doesn't matter in this case.

While that's true, the cause of a person's actions have implications for what is a suitable way of dealing with the situation.

Is rehabilitation possible? If so, why? And what kind of environment would accomplish this, compared to what might make matters worse?

Not to mention that a lot of 'justice' often seems more involved with revenge rather than preventing further harm, or trying to undo some of the harm caused.

"it doesn't matter" might be true in an immediate sense, but in a way it's also something of a copout. It means society doesn't really have to give much consideration to what happens next.

 

[bombadilillo]

Depends if you believe prison should be for.

1.Punishment
2.Rehabilitation
3.removal from society.

All 3 are valid at certain times imo. Murder, especially by this supposedly normal guy leads to number 3.

 

[eternal-chaplain]

The motto of the law has always been "Ignorance is no defense."

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Punish him

The logic is that "if they cannot remember, they aren't the same person". Therefor, they must be willing to give up everything they owned before, or they are in some regards taking advantage of not remembering. If you aren't the "same person" you have no right to anything you formerly posessed.

 

[Mr. 47]

The victem's family deserves to know that the murderer is behind bars. Charge him. If he murders once, he could again.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

Wow, I'm surprised by the results so far...

Personally, I think there's something tragic about waking up one day and finding out you committed a murder and you'll be severely punished for it. Just my opinion...

 

[bombadilillo]

Wow, I'm surprised by the results so far...

Personally, I think there's something tragic about waking up one day and finding out you committed a murder and you'll be severely punished for it. Just my opinion...

Well obviously you are capable and willing to do it, even if you dont think so. So wheres the problem? Feel remorse that you are a bad person, there's nothing wrong with your confinement.