On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Jay P Hailey <jayphai...@yahoo.com> wrote: > How do you prove intent?
At the Austrian Scholar's Conference 2010, there was a panel of "Libertarian Lawyers" that I found exceptionally interesting. One pointed out how the concept of "punishment" was actually a carry-over from Cannon Law of the church, as the state took over all social functions. Now where was that... http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=228 It's somewhere in the 40s, but they are not listing the lectures by number, just subject and author. Anyway, it followed Hoppe in this list: http://media.mises.org/mp3/ASC2010/ There are a bunch of talks entitled "Practicing Law In Light Of Rothbard", and it's in there. Anyway, the gist of the talk is that the same action, if proven to have been deliberate, can have "punitive" damages, but as Jay points out, how can anyone know intent? The same underlying message was in the movie _Minority Report_. But if we're going to Appeal To Authority in El Neil, then we aught to also cite _Timepeeper_, where he has no death penalty what so ever, save "at the time of the crime, at the hands of the intended victim". The fact is that community standards will apply to adjudication just as it does to everything else. In the Viking lands, Danegeld was the price of a man's life. At the same time, while the _price_ might be paid by a wealthy man who decided to kill someone, their reputations meant more than the money. > More over, what if in the intervening years, the subject has turned his > life around and is a positive asset to community? Does his bad intent 15 > years ago outweigh his good intent now? Like German concentration camp guards found 40 years later? Yeah, always seemed like overkill to me, too. > how do we weight that? I don't. Someone will. Curt-
