1.The main goal behind this paper is to explore the aspects and meaning of what conspiracy crime or the crime of conspiracy entails in its broad legal term. Starting off with the definition or general terminology of the crime of conspiracy means, it is simply the agreement between two or more parties to conduct or to perform an act that is deemed as illegal, harmful, or constitute some sort of damages to an individual or property. In other words, or to put it in simpler terms, the crime of conspiracy is the intentions and self-acknowledgment and will to take upon an act that is deemed unlawful. The layout of the information in this research paper will fall into two parts: breaking down the components of the above-mentioned definition and a brief look into the crime of conspiracy in the untied states as far as its legal terminology.
The crime of conspiracy in the above-mentioned definition states three different components in order to have a “conspiracy” to perform an unlawful act. These three must be present in full capacities in order to be legally labeled as such:
– Conspiracy simply means agreement between two or more parties. These parties must exist and agreed upon intentions must be present.
– The content of the agreement must entail the intention to cause harm or inflict damages to either personal or properties that ultimately deemed as unlawful.
– Although just having the intentions, plans, and agreement is sufficient to call or labels this as crime however, an act or some sort of doing also needs to be present in order to legally fully label it as such.
These were the overall general limitations and borders of what can be categorized as a crime of conspiracy in order to legally dealt with. There are other minor details or other areas in which deals with additional aspects of this category however, they will be for more in-depth details that only a specialized need to address.
On to the second component of this paper which is the crime of conspiracy in the united states legal system. The same definition can be used in order to get an idea of its legal terminology over here. There is no need for the secrecy factor i.e. the agreement and/or planning does not need to be done in secret also, a perfectly legal act like renting a van can be labeled as illegal if the usage was for robbing a bank for example. It is to be factored in that it falls upon the prosecutor responsibly to connect the dots of the overall conspiracy and establish the number of members or parties involved.
After briefly going over the general meaning of what the crime of conspiracy means or entails and taking a very quick view in its function through the U.S legal system, one can have a better understanding of its components and overall limitations.
Herring, Jonathan (2008). Criminal Law: Text, Cases and Materials (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 812.
The Law Commission. Codification of the Criminal Law: Conspiracies to affect a public mischief and to commit a civil wrong. Working Paper, No 63. 1975. para. 4 to 30
2. To understand Vicarious Liability, we’ll begin with an example scenario. We will use the name of Harry. He is an employee of Burger King. Harry decides that he would shred corporate papers in his area of operation. The documents pertained to a lawsuit suing for sexual harassment. The lawsuit was valued as a multimillion-dollar action suit. According to corporate liability in modern theory, Harry and Burger King could both be prosecuted for a criminal activity of obstruction of justice. The Burger King vicarious liability is dependent of its relationship to the employee.
First, there is Harry who could been acting within his employment scope of work. Second are the owners of Burger King as shareholders to the corporation. They did not actively involve themselves with Harry or agree with or help execute Harry’s decision to destroy the information. They still are liable possibly as a shared expense or punishment. More than likely punishment would be job loss and fines. Jail time may not be necessary, but it can still be an option.
Here is another example. “Bob hires John as a forklift operator. While moving a large crate to the customer loading zone, John hits a customer’s car, damaging it. John was engaged in the duties required by his employment; therefore, Bob can be held vicarious liable for the damages”. (legal dictionary, 2019). In the medical care field, the doctors, a hospital, and administration can be found vicariously liable due to acts of the employees.
If we broke down the administration personnel, that could include nurses, lab technicians, physicians, imaging personnel performing MRI, CT and other required scans of the body, and any other staff member that would be involved in hospital or doctor support chain. The doctors must make sure the personnel that was addressed have the proper qualifications and credentials to perform their jobs, the only way it may not be considered liability is if the doctor is in a contractor status, and not have assigned employees involved.
John happened to have abdominal pain. Over time it was determined he needed surgery. He was able to receive that surgery. After a few weeks John still had abdominal pain as if he may have a broken rib. He was rushed to an emergency center, where the imaging technician completed a scan of the area in pain. It was found that a surgical clamp was left in his “abdominal cavity”. John had to receive emergency surgery. Technically, John could sue not only the doctor of his prior surgery, but the hospital as well for malpractice.
I myself have recently went through this issue. It is less of an issue then the examples I provided. Under Department of Homeland Security (DHS), there are 21 agencies. At my current job we store multiple vehicles from multiple agencies in our warehouse. One of our employees backed into it with a forklift. This forklift caused $4,000 to $7,000 dollars of damage. The difference in price is due to the three quotes we had to receive for the damage. So even though we allowed the storage of these vehicles and we should have written a policy or agreement telling the tenants that they take full responsibility for storage, that did not happen. We wound up taking full liability for the damage.
The employee did not have to pay a cent for the damage that was made. The reason for this is General Schedule Vehicles are insured by their organization. It is a part of the contract for long term leases. Our organization took full responsibility for the action and had to pay. We have since provided policy to say if someone parks their vehicle in the warehouse, regardless of accident, they would be liable due to vehicles not being allowed to be parked inside. If corporations developed their policy and procedures, they would not be held liable for many acts that were at the fault of the consumer.