Case Study: U.S. v. Irish Jurisdiction (Case Study Sample)

Case Study: U.S. v. Irish Jurisdiction By; Insert your name Course/ Semester Professor’s name Institution Date due Introduction The defendant visited the location of the incident in 2020 when protests against police brutality were rampant. He picked up a rifle and walked right into the middle of the protest location. On the night of 25th August 2020, the situation grew more tense, and the accused fought with protesters. Videos and statements from witnesses describe a chain of occurrences in which the accused the killing of the first victim with shots, the second victim with shots, and injured the third victim, respectively. There have been arguments about the shooting circumstances constituting the central points of the case, whether it was an act of assassination or if intentions to fight for his life were genuine and the threat he faced was severe enough. They have better knowledge of the claims and counter-claims and can effectively challenge the subversive groups. Ultimately, the accused was charged with several offenses which included first-degree intentional homicide toward the death of the first victim, first-degree reckless homicide of the death of the second victim, and attempted first-degree intentional homicide by reason of injuring the third victim. Finally, a misdemeanor was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 years. His defense was based on the claim that he was simply protecting himself. His lawyer tried arguing that he believed he was about to kill or being killed during the face-offs with the protesters and for that reason he used deadly force to attempt to save his life in court. From the defense, evidence and witness testimony was brought out that would reinforce his contention that he had reasonable grounds to believe that his actions were necessary to avert imminent harm. The issue of self-defense was the central premise of the trial because the court had to determine if his violent act could be considered justifiable given the circumstances of the man at the time of the protests in the location of the incident. Irish Jurisdiction In Ireland, the principle of self-defense is recognized within the criminal law system. 2011 Criminal Law (Defence and the Dwelling) Act sets out the principles relating to self-defense (Prendergast, 2015). Under Irish law, individuals can apply reasonable force to protect themselves or anyone else from immediate danger (O'Mahony, 2013). Defense must be proportional to the perceived threat to life and, ideally, should not cause unnecessary killing. The main ideas of self-defense in Ireland include an appropriate and disproportionate response to the threat posed. For self-defense to be a successful claim, individuals must show that they had a genuine belief that there was an imminent threat to their well-being or that of others and that their response was reasonable and necessary to deal with the imminent or apparent threat. Irish law underlines the necessity to use no more force than it is necessary, and the considerations of reasonableness are tied to the circumstances. On the objectively reasonable basis of self-defense, the person’s subjective belief is taken into consideration. For instance, DPP v Padraig Nally is a case that deals with the defense of self-defense in a murder trial, and the defendant claimed that he was entitled to exercise lethal force to protect himself from an unlawful attack (Court of Criminal Appeal, 2006). Similarly, this case is regarding self-defense consideration in a high-profile trial, where the defendant was charged with a shooting during civil unrest. In both scenarios, the defendants’ subjective state of mind during the incidents is a crucial factor in deciding the legality of their actions. Furthermore, the question of whether or not the force was objectively reasonable and necessary for self-defense is at the core of both cases. In addition, the trials in both cases created a lot of public interest and prompted discussions about self-defense laws and the employment of force in hazardous circumstances. Application of Irish Self-Defense Laws to The Case Under Irish regulations, force used in self-defense should be reasonable and proportional to the perceived threat. Self-defense was determined on the grounds of whether the accused genuinely believed he was in imminent peril of his life and if his reaction was reasonable in the situation. What may be the significant point is the fact he was armed with a rifle, it was a deadly weapon, which could affect the proportionality evaluation. In the laws of Ireland, unnecessary harm is to be avoided and the self-defense defense involves the evaluation of whether other alternatives were available and reasonable, such as de-escalation. Ireland has a legal framework that is concerned with a delicate comprehension of the particular threats faced and the suitability of response. Potential Charges in the Irish Jurisdiction If his actions are considered to have led to death without the proper intent on his part with regard to murder in Irish law manslaughter charges may be considered. Manslaughter can be broken down even further to voluntary manslaughter which would be when intent was made to cause grievous harm but not kill, or involuntary manslaughter where death came about because of recklessness or criminal negligence. These injuries on the third victim may warrant assault charges. In Ireland, assault charges vary according to the degree of injury inflicted and the criminal intent (Windle et al., 2022). If it is determined that his actions led to injuries on the third victim but failed to meet the elements for more serious charges, assault charges might take place. Since the accused possessed a rifle, charges of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 may apply in the Irish scenario. Irish law defines rules about the ownership of firearms and other dangerous weapons to ensure the welfare of the people. In Ireland, for the manslaughter plea, it should be proved that the accused caused the death of another person and that their actions were the substantial cause of death (O’Malley, 2016). The prosecution would need to demonstrate that his activity was unlawful and he understood or should have understood there was a substantial risk of grave harm or death inevitably associated with these actions. Assault charges in Ireland usually require proof that the accused knowingly or carelessly inflicted harm to another person. The charges vary depending, first, on the level of harm perpetrated, and second, on the mental state of the defendant during the offense. As such, the conviction of this offense obliges the prosecution to show that the accused illegally possessed a lethal weapon, including a dag...