UAH is secular, intellectual and non-aligned politically, culturally or religiously email discussion group.


{UAH} GUILTY ON SIGHT – STRICT LIABILITY

GUILTY ON SIGHT – STRICT LIABILITY

Mafabi has been trying to woo Stella without success until last week when he heard her say that she would like to go sightseeing with a boyfriend in a car. Mafabi immediately borrowed his friend's car and asked Stella to escort him to Entebbe. While Mafabi was dreamily looking at Stella in the co-driver's seat, he accidentally passed a red traffic light. The dreaded arm of the traffic officer was immediately raised and Mafabi stopped. He apologised and explained how he did not mean to pass the light, the traffic officer insisted that he had committed an offence. He was given two options, pay the fine or go to the police and park the car. Mafabi took the ticket but felt very aggrieved after all he was sure he was supposed to be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

DOES THE LAW ALLOW YOU TO BE SEEN AS GUILTY IMMEDIATELY?

Yes, it does. This is because the law wants to avoid excuses when dealing with certain acts and omissions. Such offences are called Strict liability offences. This is where a person is held responsible (guilty) of an offence just because they did the thing prohibited by the law or deemed as an offence or wrong. These offences are not dependent on your intentions or feelings about what you are doing (This is called the state of mind). What matters is that you have acted or failed to act as required by the law.

For example, if it is a criminal one, if you are above the speed limit, you will not have to give reasons why, you are just immediately guilty of overspeeding. So, in the case of Mafabi, even if he did not mean to pass the red light, he will be taken to have committed the criminal offence just because of his actions. This is usually the case with all traffic offences. This does not mean you will always be taken to court; the police officer can choose whether to let you off with a fine, a caution or to impound the motor vehicle. What do you think, should a person be given a chance to explain themselves to determine their intention? Let us know in the comments.

--
"When a man is stung by a bee, he doesn't set off to destroy all beehives"

--
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ugandans at Heart (UAH) Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ugandans-at-heart/CAFxDTforDrWEtWBRfAzV91ZZkJ8e6HMQKPWKQyn0oYaPpQBQSg%40mail.gmail.com.

Sharing is Caring:


WE LOVE COMMENTS


0 comments:

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Blog Archive

Followers