Thread: HR 347
View Single Post
  #9  
Old 7 March 2012, 21:01
Markslams Markslams is offline
Nonrate
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ManBearPig Central
Posts: 393
I was going to post about this the other day when I came across it. I didn't because this law is already on the books and is nothing new. What they are doing, which this article clearly explains, is removing a single word "willfully". Now I must say that it is indeed troubling, but I don't believe this is a huge power grab as it's being made out to be.


Quote:
... for a defendant to have acted willfully, he must merely have “acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful.”...we focus our discussion on whether Bursey “willfully” violated the Statute, because, generally, “[m]ore is required” with respect to conduct performed willfully than conduct performed knowingly... requires “more culpable” mens rea than knowing violation).As a general proposition, the statutory term “knowingly” requires the Government to prove only that the defendant had knowledge of the facts underlying the offense
__________________
I plan on dying early so I don't have to listen to my snivelling family - rgrjoe175

But hey, you're a Marine. Bang all the fat ugly broads you want.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- BigNickT
Reply With Quote