this post was submitted on 31 May 2022
2 points (57.1% liked)
World News
32285 readers
789 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not a lawyer or anything, but I'm pretty sure you're off there. What they're emphasizing is that you don't have to do the crime itself to be guilty of conspiracy. Thing is, you still have to at least do the conspiracy. There is no guilt by association. Of course, this is all under US law. I'm not sure what any Ukrainian fighters would be subject to.
Of course, the war criminals who ordered the indiscriminate shelling of Ukraine won't be brought to any justice. They will stay far behind the military and economic lines, safe from consequences.
Yes, you need to do the conspiracy, but, overt agreement is part of that. Just like a hitman simply saying "sure, I'll kill her" constitutes entering into the conspiracy, if, say, whatever initiation oath the Azov makes you recite says anything about working toward racial purity or anything like that, that would probably count. Or, if they at any point help in any way with any of the Azov's war efforts.
Remember that conspiracy law punishes all members of that conspiracy of every crime committed under it. If you and your friend rob a store, and your friend decides to shoot the cashier on their way out, even if they did not consult you, you're on the hook for murder. This video has two scenes with very Layman friendly explanations by a real lawyer of how that works in the US, and what constitutes a conspiracy in general
So how should this be applied to Russian war criminals?
I made another comment about that.
Sorry, should have replied to that one instead.