I'm wondering what's happening if a conjoined twin commits a crime, but the other one is innocent and it's proven only one of them are guilty.
Not every twins are possible to separate. It's not possible to kill one (death penalty) without killing the other one either. If we sentence them to prison, both of them have to go there since they're sharing body.
A twin can kill another person hiding a knife or gun in their purse. The innocent one can't always prevent it regardless of how hard they tries. I'm also curios on what would happen if they suspect that the criminal twin would repeat the crime without punishing the innocent one.
In my country they won't get jailed because its considerated a desease here.
I think that all conjointed people shoul be aborted if the parents know about the desease , same with mental illness. This seems cruel. But why would someone give birth to them? Why would you want to see your kids suffer and battling with their desease every day? Its not easy for the family at all after the parents die , the kids grow up and need someone to care for them because they can't. And Yes. I knows how it is to have someone in family that can't function proper. My ster sister (my dad was married twice ) has mental illness , she is 24 but wear diapers and act like a kid and cry if someone scares her , she doesn't let us go away and start crying. I broke ties with her and let her at her mother because she can't live a normal life , and the people around her can't do it too.
Conjoined twins are a resust of the parents fault, instead of taking care what they do when they are pregnant , I see so many women still drink , take different pills , smoke and are careless. There are already way too many people that can't do nothing because they were born different. Different is not bad , but if that means that can't do nothing on their own and make other people life a hell , they should be aborted. Dont have a kid if you can't give him the best life.
I don't think abortion is a good solution on that problem. You can't choose which life is worthy living for someone else, you can't choose what someone else's happiness is and how they feels. Something that would be awful for you may be okay for someone else despite the challenges. Abby and Brittany Hensel are conjoined twins. They're happy with their lives and wants to live.
A disability don't make someone lesser worth. It don't take away their right to live and it don't mean they're unable to enjoy life. It's completely individual. Regardless if you get to know if a child has a disability or not, you can never tell in advance if they're going to live a happy life or not. I've autism and some people with similar opinions as you thinks people like me should be aborted as well. I can live a happy life with my condition and I'm glad people can't tell in advance if I've it or not, so no one could abort me for that reason.
We don't need a sorting society. We needs a understanding and loving society where both people and the government cared more. We should be lesser judgmental and rather treat people different than us with respect, so their lives would be easier. If they don't want to live, I think it should rather be their own choice to end it instead of other people doing it without their consent. The difference between euthanasia and abortion is the first one is consenting, the other one is doing something against someone's will. It's like sex, a yes is a yes.
I knows many disabled people. Some are physical disabled, but other's are mentally. Some even have intellectual disabilities. Some may stay young forever, but as long everyone contribute so everyone gets a nice life, it don't need to be a big issue. They're a minority and we're able to take care of them like everyone else. By the way, in many cases it's people around them that sees them as a burden. They usually don't see their disability (con)
as a problem. Intellectual disabled people are born that way and they sees their condition as "normal". They don't know about anything else and most of them experience life as children.
You miss my point dude. Its about knowing exactly if your child will have that. Im not talking about people who were already born. Autism is not that bad , try to live with someone who has schizophrenia and someone who acts like a toddler even if they are 24. You will agree with me. If someone can't work and enjoy life , its no point of increasing the number of people unable to work. Why? Would you raise a child knowing him or her will totally lost their lives and makes your hell? Would you be that cruel to let them live a live of suffering?
In not talking about depression , Post traumatic disorder or autism and AdHD. Im talking about desease that people have and can't live a normal life. It was hard for me to see my step sister act like a baby even if she is about 6 years older than me , I can't imagine what her mom is going through. She wasn't even at school because no school accepted her , she can't even feed herself. You can call me selfish. But what point is to live when you can't enjoi it?
Have you asked her if she can enjoy life? From what I understands, it sounds like she's a burden for your mother and that your mother thinks it would be easier without responsibility. You can't tell if someone enjoys life or not that easily. You've to ask to find out.
Something that may look a certain way for you may be different for the person experiencing it.
She can't communicate. But its easy to say she is miserable. Imaging seeing other people grow up , move , leave , while you are at the same place and dont and can't go outside. And her mom is my dad ex wife , her mom is not also my mom. But so. She tried to commit suicide even is she can't talk and act like a baby , she saw she isn't able to enjoy her life. Its a pity to force someone to live. And Im pro Choice. If a woman wants to abort or not , its her body.
She is the reason why my dad and her mom broke up. They expected a healthy child , but they were wrong.
There isn't much case law to work with on this question, since in the United States, at least, conjoined twins represent something like 0.0005 percent of all live births—with an even smaller number surviving into adulthood. The conjoined twins who aren't separated at birth and do manage to grow up have so far tended to be more or less exemplary citizens. That said, there have been a few recorded instances of conjoined criminality. By one account, the original Siamese twins, Chang and Eng Bunker, were arrested over a scuffle with a doctor who tried to examine them, but never prosecuted. Nor were they ever charged with bigamy, despite having taken two wives.
Kill the one that seems less friendly or admits to it, then let the other go, if the crime happens again obviously you killed the wrong one... so then you just kill the last one. Of its a conjoined twin, there are plenty of complications, but no matter how sudden it may have been or even if you can prove one of them are innocent, you still can't allow a murderer to walk around on the streets so... probably just life prison, with some preferential treatment since one is innocent, or possibly even an attempt at extreme surgery to kill the murderer while keep in the other twin in full control of the body.
I don't know... I'm gonan add a little more spin to this: how would 18th century France deal with it? Would they build a special guillotine to fit 2 heads? Or would they have to lop off one after another?
They would most likely shoot them. In 18th century France when they couldn't behead someone for medical or technical reasons, they would use firing squad instead.
One of them is going to be charged with something because they are a witness to the crime and didn't report it. I guess it is an issue though because one of them would be sentenced and it would be a violation of human rights to sentence the other one. It is such a unique circumstance however that the law doesn't even have any kind of reference. I also think that they would probably be put on house arrest and it would be hard to commit a crime with only one half of your body so it would be more than likely tat they would both be sentenced regardless.
Id doubt such a situation would ever even happen. The two would have been together through everything. They'd have the same psychological trauma etc, same external influnces and would talk through everything. And even if there was one more "sane" twin, the other surely would have noticed the other acting weird a while back, if one was capable of comitting something like murder as u mentioned in one of the comments. For any other crime surely the other twin would have been able to stop the other, or at least told someone.
But I really don't know tbh if one somehow was guilty while the other wasn't.
I love the question! I think that two separate brains might work apart and together when needed. If one brain has a murderous psychosis then the other is going to fear for her safety. What do you do with people with bi-polar/split personality disorder? You put them in a mental institution. While one brain may be healthy and normal, how do you control the other? With medication.
There would have to be a lot of tests to figure out if it was a solo act, or if the twin was covering or being bullied.
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(36-45)
+1 y
This is literally one of the greatest questions I've ever seen asked here or anywhere else. So great in fact, I decided to look it up. Apparently, as far as we know in recorded history, there has only ever been one real case in which one of the twins stabbed a man to death and was sentenced to death, however, what actually happened to the two wasn't documented.
Legally speaking, at least in the US, the innocent twin cannot be denied his or her rights for that of the one who commits the crime. Most likely, the guilty twin would receive their sentence as guilty, but because of the nature of being conjoined, we legally could not jail both, nor sentence both to death in the case of murder if the death penalty was on the table.
Well if one commits it and the other does nothing/doesn’t report they are an accomplice. If they reported it it might entail a lighter sentence but as they share the same body whatever one does the other shares.
They can’t exactly cut them down the middle and wish them good lives.
I feel like if it's a repeated offense or very serious crime then they both need to go to jail because the other twin still witnessed everything and did nothing to stop -- so they're like an accessory. And I feel like they would need each other to do the crime - like for example they're literally walking to the bank and stealing money- they both did that -- even if one didn't want to -- they still did it -- ahh it's so messy lol
I would enjoy seeing how the law handles this one. I think the good twin should be allowed full freedom, and if that means the bad twin doesn't get the punishment they deserve... honestly, it's better for a bad man to go free than a free man be locked up.
Whatever the case may be it's a mandatory process you can't separate them therefore the accusation and the punishment will be sentenced as one. So what's the point of sorting out who's innocent and who's not If they're in a situation where they can't get out.
Conjoined twins live their lives with the definition of teamwork. It's impossible to complete a task without both of them, some conjoined twins also feel what the other one is doing... and some have singular control over their half of the body. They can't commit a crime single handedly (literally) and so they would both be in jail I suppose. but they have such a hard time just living, that i don't think they have extra time to commit a crime lol
thats probably a very complicated situation and probably requires a judge to make a judgement call... I don't think they have a law specifically for that
it would come down to expert witness,... to assess whether one is really innocent or not Im not sure how the movement of limbs actually works with twins like that lol
Well there's a saying in law that goes: 'It's better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly convicted.' So if they follow that, I'd imagine authorities would let them off loose (note I said 'loose,' not 'free') for the sake of not detaining the innocent one.
The government would probably charge both with either co-conspiracy or complicity, depending on the facts. Did you, or did you not, on the night of May 23rd, hear your sibling think, “I'm going to rob a bank.” And, did you, or did you not accompany your sibling on said robbery? Conspiracy charges are such a gift for prosecutors.
Maybe not 'hear them think' but I mean you'd probably know if your conjoined twin is crazy AF better than anyone, and you'd obviously notice if they grabbed a knife and were trying to go up on someone or got a gun and were about to shoot/rob people. If you didn't do something to prevent that, then your basically helping them.
That's because your personality is influenced by two things: genes and environment. The genes are the same, and the environment is also exactly the same.
So it would be unlikely for one of the twins to commit a heavy crime, while the other one is totally against it.
There was a case like this in France. It is on the weird side of youtube. I think they let them go free coz they couldn't punish the guilty one with the innocent one.
Not if one of them went to a gun sport club as a hobby and the other one didn't have it as a hobby, and on the way home one of them had a gun, but the other one didn't. And the gun-twin suddenly shoot someone and the other twin couldn't prevent it in time.
Some conjoined twins don't have the same hobby, but do sometime agree to let the other twin do their hobby although s/he's not into it.
Give the guilty side half of the sentence. If the non-guilty side complains, he/she may be allowed to leave the room. Justice and law cannot be fair throughout anyway.
The other twin is not an accomplice if overpowered by the other. A judge would have to assign counselling andfor the gulty party. The judge may assign a guard to protect the innocent twin when ever they leave the house like house arrest / witness protection.
This question is giving me a headache lmao. I really have no clue, this is a morality question at its best, I am going to ask a friend this and get back to you.
There's been such cases where it wasn't possible to determine which of the twins committed the crime, so the suspect gets acquitted, basically both are ruled innocent.
I find it hard to believe one twin couldn't stop the other. There would be a lot of steps leading up to the crime, plenty of opportunity. They both get the punishment.
You can't accuse someone of being an acomplice if they're saying they themself are not guilty, because they could be completely unrelated to the crime, or would you punish someon e just for looking like the suspect? 1) The innocent twin will obviously they they're not guilty, and 2) The guilty twin will obviously say they're not guilty.
I'm wondering what the court would do if one of them are found guilty, but the other one aren't. If they don't have evidence for both of them being guilty, they can't punish the innocent one.
Ikr but original horror movie that which has priyamani is Kannada but it dubbed into tollywood and other one is suriya action movie is original in Tamil was dubbed in telugu
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions