DOCSLIB.ORG

Title 16 Chapter 5 Crimes • Homicide • Assault and Battery • Kidnapping

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Title 16 Chapter 5 Crimes • Homicide • Assault and Battery • Kidnapping DJJ 14.10, Attachment C Title 16 Chapter 5 Crimes • Homicide • Assault and Battery • Kidnapping, false imprisonment and related crimes • Reckless conduct • Cruelty to children • Feticide • Stalking Title 16 Chapter 6 Sex Offenses • Rape • Sodomy and aggravated sodomy • Statutory rape • Child molestation; aggravated child molestation • Enticing a child for indecent purposes • Sexual assault by person with supervisory or disciplinary authority; sexual assault by practitioner of psychotherapy against patient • Bestiality • Necrophilia • Public indecency • Prostitution • Keeping a place of prostitution • Pimping • Pandering • Pandering by compulsion • Solicitation of sodomy • Masturbation for hire • Giving massages in placed used for lewdness, prostitution, assignation, or masturbation for hire • Fornication • Adultery • Bigamy • Marrying a bigamist • Incest • Sexual battery • Aggravated sexual battery • Publication of name or identity of female raped or assaulted with intent to commit rape • Harboring, concealing, or withholding information concerning a sexual offender Title 16 Chapter 7 Crimes • Burglary • Smash and grab burglary • Arson in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd degree • Criminal possession of an explosive device • Burning of woodlands, brush, fields, or other lands; arson of lands; destruction of or damage to material or device used in detection or suppression of wildfires DJJ 14.10, Attachment C • Manufacturing, transporting, distributing, possessing with intent to distribute, and offering to distribute an explosive device • § 16-7-83 Persons convicted or under indictment for certain offenses • § 16-7-84 Distribution of certain materials to persons under 21 years of age • Hoax devices • Attempt or conspiracy of any crimes in Title 16, Chapter 7, Article 4 • Interference with officers • Possessing, transporting, or receiving explosives or destructive devices with intent to kill, injure, or intimidate individuals or destroy public buildings Title 16, Chapter 8 Crimes • Theft by taking • Theft by deception • Theft by conversion • Theft of services • Retail property fencing • Theft of lost or mislaid property • Theft by receiving stolen property • Theft by receiving property stolen in another state • Theft by bringing stolen property into the state • Theft of trade secrets • Theft by shoplifting • Conversion of payments for real property investments • Theft by extortion • Misuse of Universal Product Code labels • Entering automobile or other motor vehicle with intent to commit theft or felony • Conversion of leased personal property • Livestock theft • Removal or abandonment of shopping carts • Robbery • Armed robbery; robbery by intimidation Title 16, Chapter 9 Crimes • Forgery • Manufacturing, selling or distributing false identification document • Counterfeit or false proof of insurance document • Printing, executing, or negotiating checks, drafts, orders or debit card sales drafts knowing information thereon to be in error, fictitious, or assigned to another account holder • Financial transaction card theft • Forgery of financial transaction card • Financial transaction card fraud • Criminal possession of financial transaction card forgery devices • Criminal receipt of goods and services fraudulently obtained • Criminal factoring of financial transaction card records • Unauthorized use of financial transaction card DJJ 14.10, Attachment C • Publication of information regarding schemes, devices, means, or methods for financial transaction card fraud or theft of telecommunication services • Deceptive business practices • Destruction, removal, concealment, encumbrance, or transfer of property subject to security interest • Improper solicitation of money • Damaging, destroying, or secreting property to defraud another • False statements by telephone solicitors • Fraudulently obtaining or attempting to obtain public housing or reduction in public housing rent • Fraudulent attempts to obtain funds • False representation as representative of peace officer organization or fire service organization • Failing to pay for natural products or chattels • Operation of credit repairs services organization • Misrepresenting the origin or ownership of timber or agricultural commodities • Crimes utilizing automated sales suppression devices, zapper or phantom-ware • Removal of collars or identifying items or marks on animals • Misleading transmittal and use of individual name, trade name, registered trademark, logo, legal or official seal, or copyrighted symbol over computer or telephone network • Initiation of deceptive commercial email • Fraudulent business practices using Internet or email • Installation or reinstallation of object in lieu of or other than air bag • Attempting or conspiring to commit aggravated identity fraud • Spyware, browsers, hijacks, and other software prohibited • E-mail virus distribution, denial of service attacks and other conduct prohibited • Inducement to install, copy, or execute software through misrepresentation Title 16, Chapter 12 Crimes • Selling, loaning, distributing, or exhibiting; duties of video game retailers Title 40, Chapter 6 Crimes • Homicide by vehicle • Feticide by vehicle • Serious injury by vehicle .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Crime, Law Enforcement, and Punishment
    Shirley Papers 48 Research Materials, Crime Series Inventory Box Folder Folder Title Research Materials Crime, Law Enforcement, and Punishment Capital Punishment 152 1 Newspaper clippings, 1951-1988 2 Newspaper clippings, 1891-1938 3 Newspaper clippings, 1990-1993 4 Newspaper clippings, 1994 5 Newspaper clippings, 1995 6 Newspaper clippings, 1996 7 Newspaper clippings, 1997 153 1 Newspaper clippings, 1998 2 Newspaper clippings, 1999 3 Newspaper clippings, 2000 4 Newspaper clippings, 2001-2002 Crime Cases Arizona 154 1 Cochise County 2 Coconino County 3 Gila County 4 Graham County 5-7 Maricopa County 8 Mohave County 9 Navajo County 10 Pima County 11 Pinal County 12 Santa Cruz County 13 Yavapai County 14 Yuma County Arkansas 155 1 Arkansas County 2 Ashley County 3 Baxter County 4 Benton County 5 Boone County 6 Calhoun County 7 Carroll County 8 Clark County 9 Clay County 10 Cleveland County 11 Columbia County 12 Conway County 13 Craighead County 14 Crawford County 15 Crittendon County 16 Cross County 17 Dallas County 18 Faulkner County 19 Franklin County Shirley Papers 49 Research Materials, Crime Series Inventory Box Folder Folder Title 20 Fulton County 21 Garland County 22 Grant County 23 Greene County 24 Hot Springs County 25 Howard County 26 Independence County 27 Izard County 28 Jackson County 29 Jefferson County 30 Johnson County 31 Lafayette County 32 Lincoln County 33 Little River County 34 Logan County 35 Lonoke County 36 Madison County 37 Marion County 156 1 Miller County 2 Mississippi County 3 Monroe County 4 Montgomery County
    [Show full text]
  • Kidnap and Ransom/Extortion Coverage Part
    KIDNAP AND RANSOM/EXTORTION COVERAGE PART I. INSURING AGREEMENTS This Non-Liability Coverage Part applies to the Ransom Monies, Expenses, and Personal Incidental Loss stated below that are paid by an Insured Entity at any time, provided, however, that: (i) such payments result from a covered Kidnapping, Extortion Threat, Detention, or Hijacking that occurs during the Policy Period and (ii) the Insured Entity discovers such occurrence, and makes a claim for reimbursement under this Non-Liability Coverage Part , no later than twelve (12) months after the expiration of the Policy Period . (A) Kidnap/Ransom/Extortion The Insurer shall reimburse Ransom Monies paid by an Insured Entity resulting from a covered Kidnapping or Extortion Threat . (B) Expense The Insurer shall reimburse Expenses paid by an Insured Entity resulting from a covered Kidnapping, Extortion Threat , Detention or Hijacking of any Insured Person . (C) Custody/Delivery If, as a result of a covered Kidnapping or Extortion Threat , an Insured Entity sustains a destruction, disappearance, confiscation or wrongful appropriation of Ransom Monies, while they are being delivered to persons demanding such Ransom Monies by someone who is authorized by the Insured Entity to deliver them, the Insurer will reimburse the Insured Entity for such Ransom Monies . (D) Personal Incidental Loss The Insurer shall reimburse an Insured Entity for payments made to an Insured Person, or such person’s estate in the event of Loss of Life , for the Personal Incidental Loss sustained by such Insured Person from a covered Kidnapping , Detention or Hijacking. II. DEFINITIONS The following terms, whether used in the singular or plural in this Non-Liability Coverage Part , shall have the meaning specified below: • “Bodily Injury Extortion” means any threat, communicated to an Insured Entity or an Insured Person for the purpose of demanding Ransom Monies, to kill, physically injure or kidnap an Insured Person .
    [Show full text]
  • Penal Code Offenses by Punishment Range Office of the Attorney General 2
    PENAL CODE BYOFFENSES PUNISHMENT RANGE Including Updates From the 85th Legislative Session REV 3/18 Table of Contents PUNISHMENT BY OFFENSE CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................... 2 PENALTIES FOR REPEAT AND HABITUAL OFFENDERS .......................................................... 4 EXCEPTIONAL SENTENCES ................................................................................................... 7 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 4 ................................................................................................. 8 INCHOATE OFFENSES ........................................................................................................... 8 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 5 ............................................................................................... 11 OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON ....................................................................................... 11 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 6 ............................................................................................... 18 OFFENSES AGAINST THE FAMILY ......................................................................................... 18 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 7 ............................................................................................... 20 OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY .......................................................................................... 20 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 8 ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY: the STATE of MIND CRIME-INTENT, PROVING INTENT, and ANTI-FEDERAL Intentt
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1976 Criminal Conspiracy: The tS ate of Mind Crime - Intent, Proving Intent, Anti-Federal Intent Paul Marcus William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Marcus, Paul, "Criminal Conspiracy: The tS ate of Mind Crime - Intent, Proving Intent, Anti-Federal Intent" (1976). Faculty Publications. 557. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/557 Copyright c 1976 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY: THE STATE OF MIND CRIME-INTENT, PROVING INTENT, AND ANTI-FEDERAL INTENTt Paul Marcus* I. INTRODUCTION The crime of conspiracy, unlike other substantive or inchoate crimes, deals almost exclusively with the state of mind of the defendant. Although a person may simply contemplate committing a crime without violating the law, the contemplation becomes unlawful if the same criminal thought is incorporated in an agreement. The state of mind element of conspiracy, however, is not concerned entirely with this agreement. As Dean Harno properly remarked 35 years ago, "The conspiracy consists not merely in the agreement of two or more but in their intention."1 That is, in their agreement the parties not only must understand that they are uniting to commit a crime, but they also must desire to complete that crime as the result of their combination. Criminal conspiracy, therefore, involves two distinct states of mind. The first state of mind prompts the conspirators to reach an agreement; the second relates to the crime that is the object of the agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Kidnapping, Hostage Taking, Extortion, Attacks
    Prevention and Coping Strategies Kidnapping, Hostage Taking, Extortion, Attacks About EuNAT The European Network of Advisory Teams (EuNAT) is a network of experienced law enforcement advisory teams from across Europe, who provide a mechanism for immediate international cooperation when responding to the threat of kidnapping, hostage taking and extortion, where life is at risk. The network represents a platform for sharing good practice in this specific field throughout the EU and within the members’ respective countries, within the constraints of each Member State’s legal framework. EuNAT: Sharing knowledge saves lives. 1 Foreword Due to your personal and/or professional circumstances, you and your family may be at a higher risk of being affected by a serious offence like kidnapping, hostage taking or extortion. Experience shows that these crimes are often well prepared by the perpetrators. The offender might take advantage of the victim’s routines or habits in order to identify opportunities for an attack. Understanding this will help you identify any weak spots in your routines and take steps to reduce the risk of becoming a victim. This also applies to spontaneous crimes such as robberies. This brochure aims to help you minimise potential and foreseeable risks and suggests how you can do this, in order to be as safe as possible. It should be used in accordance with national and company laws, policies and procedures. The content may reinforce what you already know or raise new ideas that you have not yet considered. It also contains recommendations for reacting to critical situations like a kidnapping. 2 Contents Foreword ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • TABLE 9.26 Capital Punishment
    CRIMINAL JUSTICE/CORRECTIONS TABLE 9.26 Capital Punishment State or other Prisoners under Capital punishment jurisdiction Capital offenses by state sentence of death abolished Method of execution Alabama Intentional murder with 18 aggravating factors (Ala. Stat. Ann. 13A-5-40(a)(1)-(18)). 182 Electrocution or lethal injection Alaska … … 1957 … First-degree murder, including pre-meditated murder and felony murder, Arizona 121 Lethal gas or lethal injection (a) accompanied by at least 1 of 14 aggravating factors (A.R.S. § 13-703(F)). Capital murder (Ark. Code Ann. 5-10-101) with a finding of at least 1 of 10 Lethal injection or Arkansas 32 aggravating circumstances; treason. electrocution (b) First-degree murder with special circumstances; sabotage; train wrecking causing California death; treason; perjury causing execution of an innocent person; fatal assault by a 740 Lethal injection prisoner serving a life sentence. First-degree murder with at least 1 of 17 aggravating factors; first-degree Colorado 3 Lethal injection kidnapping resulting in death; treason. Connecticut … (c) 0 2012 … Delaware … (d) (d) 2016 … Florida (e) First-degree murder; felony murder; capital drug trafficking; capital sexual battery. 354 Electrocution or lethal injection Murder with aggravating circumstances; kidnapping with bodily injury or ransom Georgia 56 Lethal injection when the victim dies; aircraft hijacking; treason. Hawaii … … 1957 … First-degree murder with aggravating factors; first-degree kidnapping; perjury Idaho 9 Lethal injection resulting in death. Illinois … (f) 0 2011 … Indiana Murder with 17 aggravating circumstances (IC 35-50-2-9). 11 Lethal injection or electrocution Iowa … … 1965 … Capital murder with 8 aggravating circumstances (KSA 21-3439, KSA 21-4625, Kansas 10 Lethal injection KSA 21-4636).
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Northern District of Alabama Western Division
    Case 7:08-cv-02025-LSC Document 45 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 26 FILED 2010 Jan-27 AM 09:23 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION RACHEL MASSEY, ] ] Plaintiff, ] ] vs. ] 7:08-CV-02025-LSC ] SMITHWAY MOTOR XPRESS, INC., ] WESTERN EXPRESS, INC., ] ] Defendants. ] Memorandum of Opinion I. Introduction. The Court has for consideration a motion for summary judgment, which was filed on September 25, 2009, by Defendant Smithway Motor Xpress, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Smithway”). (Doc. 35.) Rachel Massey (“Plaintiff”) has brought this action for claims arising from an incident in which an employee of Defendant, Roy Scott Stillwell (“Stillwell”), kidnapped and sexually assaulted Plaintiff over a period of four days. (Doc. 1.) Western Express, Inc. (“Western”), the parent company of Smithway, was originally a party to this action but was dismissed with prejudice on June 1, Page 1 of 26 Case 7:08-cv-02025-LSC Document 45 Filed 01/27/10 Page 2 of 26 2009, pursuant to a stipulated motion by Plaintiff. (Docs. 21-23.) Plaintiff has filed four counts against Defendant for vicarious liability; negligent or wanton hiring, retention and supervision; negligence and wantonness; and combined and concurring negligence and wantoness. Defendant has moved for summary judgment on all counts. (Doc. 35.) Plaintiff has also filed a partial motion for summary judgment on Defendant’s defense of contributory negligence. (Doc. 37.) The issues raised in the parties’ motions for summary judgment have been briefed by both parties and are now ripe for decision.
    [Show full text]
  • Kidnapping Federalism: United States V. Wills and the Constitutionality of Extending Federal Criminal Law Into the States M
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 93 Article 7 Issue 2 Winter Winter 2003 Kidnapping Federalism: United States v. Wills and the Constitutionality of Extending Federal Criminal Law into the States M. Todd Scott Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation M. Todd Scott, Kidnapping Federalism: United States v. Wills and the Constitutionality of Extending Federal Criminal Law into the States, 93 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 753 (2002-2003) This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/03/9302-0753 THE JOURNALOF CRIMINAL LAW& CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 93, Nos.2-3 Copyright © 2003 by Northestern University, School of Law Printed in U.S.A. KIDNAPPING FEDERALISM: UNITED STATES v. WILLS AND THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF EXTENDING FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAW INTO THE STATES M. TODD SCOTT* On March 1, 1932, Charles and Anne Lindberg's twenty-month- old baby boy was kidnapped out of his nursery while he slept.' Known for many years after as the "crime of the century," the kidnapping of the Lindberg baby was, at the time, highly sensationalized. 2 Not only did it involve Lindberg, the man who had flown solo across the Atlantic to become the age's "greatest
    [Show full text]
  • Published United States Court of Appeals for The
    PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2254 LIBERTY UNIVERSITY, INC., Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CITIZENS INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA; HANOVER AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY; HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants – Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:13-cv-00033-NKM-RSB) Argued: May 13, 2015 Decided: July 10, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge Thacker wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer and Judge Duncan joined. ARGUED: John Peter Malloy, ROBINSON & COLE LLP, Hartford, Connecticut, for Appellants. Harold Edward Johnson, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Thomas S. Garrett, HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN & WELLMAN, Richmond, Virginia; Wystan M. Ackerman, ROBINSON & COLE LLP, Hartford, Connecticut, for Appellants. Calvin W. Fowler, Jr., WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. THACKER, Circuit Judge: In November 2012, Janet Jenkins sued Liberty University, Inc. (“Appellee”), alleging that the school participated -- both directly and vicariously -- in a scheme to kidnap Jenkins’s daughter in order to disrupt the parent-child relationship. In her complaint (“Jenkins Complaint”), Jenkins alleged that Appellee and its agents helped Lisa Miller, the child’s biological mother and Jenkins’ former partner in a same- sex civil union, to defy state court visitation orders and to abscond with the child to Nicaragua. The district court ruled that Citizens Insurance Company of America (“Appellant”), Appellee’s liability insurance carrier, has a duty to defend Appellee. Under the insurance policy at issue, Appellant must defend Appellee against suits alleging certain harms that arise from an “occurrence” -- an unexpected accident, which does not fall under any of the coverage exclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • PENAL CODE (Act No.45 of 1907)
    この刑法の翻訳は、平成十八年法律第三六号までの改正（平成１８年５月２８日施行） について、」 「法令用語日英標準対訳辞書 （平成１８年３月版）に準拠して作成したもので す。 なお、この法令の翻訳は公定訳ではありません。法的効力を有するのは日本語の法令自 体であり、翻訳はあくまでその理解を助けるための参考資料です。この翻訳の利用に伴っ て発生した問題について、一切の責任を負いかねますので、法律上の問題に関しては、官 報に掲載された日本語の法令を参照してください。 This English translation of the Penal Code has been prepared (up to the revisions of Act No. 36 of 2006(Effective May 28, 2006)) in compliance with the Standard Bilingual Dictionary (March 2006 edition). This is an unofficial translation. Only the original Japanese texts of laws and regulations have legal effect, and the translations are to be used solely as reference material to aid in the understanding of Japanese laws and regulations. The Government of Japan shall not be responsible for the accuracy, reliability or currency of the legislative material provided in this Website, or for any consequence resulting from use of the information in this Website. For all purposes of interpreting and applying law to any legal issue or dispute, users should consult the original Japanese texts published in the Official Gazette. PENAL CODE (Act No.45 of 1907) PART I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Chapter I. Scope of Application Article 1. (Crimes Committed within Japan) (1) This Code shall apply to anyone who commits a crime within the territory of Japan. (2) The same shall apply to anyone who commits a crime on board a Japanese vessel or aircraft outside the territory of Japan. Article 2. (Crimes Committed outside Japan) This Code shall apply to anyone who commits one of the following crimes outside the territory of Japan: (i)
    [Show full text]
  • Tool 3.3 Other Offences Related to Trafficking in Persons
    112 Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons Tool 3.3 Other offences related to trafficking in persons Overview This tool discusses the criminal acts related to trafficking in persons. Many States have also criminalized much of the conduct related to human trafficking. Most States have laws criminalizing abduction, illegal sequestration and kidnapping in general. These acts constitute criminal offences in most States and could be invoked to address certain elements of the full range of crimes involved in trafficking. Crimes linked to trafficking in persons Trafficking in persons should be understood as a process rather than as a single offence. It begins with the abduction or recruitment of a person and continues with the transporta - tion and entry of the individual into another location. This is followed by the exploitation phase, during which the victim is forced into sexual or labour servitude or other forms of exploitation. A further phase may occur, which does not involve the victim but rather the offender. Depending upon the size and sophistication of the trafficking operation, the criminal (organization) may find it necessary to launder the proceeds of crime. During the trafficking process, the offenders usually perpetrate a number of different offences. There may be linkages between trafficking operations and other criminal offences such as the smuggling of weapons or drugs. Offences are also committed in furtherance or protection of the human trafficking operation. Other crimes, such as money-laundering and tax evasion, are secondary, but essential to protect the illicit proceeds of the trafficking activity. A typology can be created to further understanding of the nature of the offences related to the trafficking process.
    [Show full text]
  • Mens Rea for Sexual Abuse: the Ac Se for Defining the Acceptable Risk Eric A
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 99 Article 1 Issue 1 Fall Fall 2008 Mens Rea for Sexual Abuse: The aC se for Defining the Acceptable Risk Eric A. Johnson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Eric A. Johnson, Mens Rea for Sexual Abuse: The asC e for Defining the Acceptable Risk, 99 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 1 (2008-2009) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/09/990 1-0001 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 99, No. I Copyright © 2009 by Northwestern University, School of Law Primed mnU.S.A. CRIMINAL LAW MENS REA FOR SEXUAL ABUSE: THE CASE FOR DEFINING THE ACCEPTABLE RISK ERIC A. JOHNSON* The persistence of strict criminal liability for child sexual abuse is attributable, at least in part, to the shortcomings of the existing alternatives, namely, the recklessness and criminal negligence standards. These two standards requirejuries to define the acceptable level of risk on a case-by-case basis. Juries are ill-equipped to make this calculation in sexual abuse cases, however, and their efforts to do so almost invariably are skewed by evidence of the victim's unchastity. This Article first explores the shortcomings of the recklessness and criminal negligence standards in this setting, and then attempts to develop a viable alternative.
    [Show full text]