|Criminal procedure has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as Start-Class.|
|WikiProject Law||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Do they still have the bible in Courtrooms?
I'd just like to know if they still do that.And why explain to me also why also they don't do it anymore (and i guess is 'cause is has to do with the Separation of church and state type of thing.)So thanks and do explain it in time please.
- They still do, and it's still sworn upon (although a witness may choose which Bible or other holy book to swear on according to their faith). BD2412 T 04:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
If you hide the body... what law is that breaking?
Just wondering. I am doing a debate in english class and it is based on a book called martyn pig. The character kills his father and hides the body. I've tried searching sevral sites but can't find the answer. Can you help?
- You can start your research by looking up "obstruction of justice" and "evidence tampering", in the future, you may want to post such questions on a place like google or yahoo groups. Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 17:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I had a person fill in for me at work--I was out of the country. She typed a letter to a bank attempting to get some signatures added to an account. Not only did she type my name, she admittedly forged my signature. Is this against the law
Traffic stop and Terry
Shouldn't we mention these somewhere in this article or the template? They form a huge part of American criminal procedure! --Coolcaesar 06:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC) WOW!!! and then what happened? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theoldhenk (talk • contribs) 11:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
A bit of rephrasing for clarity?
Right near the end of the article as is stands as of 20061210 is this line:
"Increasingly, there is also a recognition that collateral consequences of criminal charges may result from the sentence that are not explicitly part of the sentence itself."
Could someone clarify what that means, and what it should mean to the reader? Is this talking about things like a parent's sentence hurting the children whose parent will then be in jail? It seems like the thought got cut off somewhere -- I find it awfully ambiguous, but it may be important, and I am just not informed enough to understand. Illumination, anyone?
timbo 16:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- The article you linked to elaborates on the concept a little bit more. The example you give seems consistent with the overall concept. I vaguely remember thinking similarly the first time I saw it in the article. Perhaps you found the wording a bit unclear, was there something else? dr.ef.tymac 17:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- It sounds to me like maybe it refers to someone who is arrested and charged for multiple crimes, but only convicted for one. Then, the sentencing for that charge is made more severe taking into consideration the other charges which are believed to be true but not worthy of conviction? I don't really know...18.104.22.168 18:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Civil v. common law
V. v. vs.
examples are given using 2 different abbreviations for versus. i beleieve that v. is commonly used in legal writing. let's get consistent. the court will now hear arguments for vs.Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)