Should Prosecutors Use Inconsistent Arguments?
Is it permissible for prosecutors to advance inconsistent fact-based arguments in successive trials seeking to convict different defendants of a crime that only one could have committed? Should the prosecutor's duty to protect the innocent in such cases outweigh the duty to convict the guilty? If so, does arguing inconsistent positions violate the duty to protect the innocent? 0Or, does arguing inconsistent positions better en- force the rights of the public by maximizing the possibility the guilty will be punished? Courts and legal commentators have explored these questions, which have arisen in a number of cases.
Place of Original Publication
19 (4) Criminal Justice 47 (2005)
Joy, Peter A. and McMunigal, Kevin C., "Should Prosecutors Use Inconsistent Arguments?" (2005). Faculty Publications. 829.
This document is currently not available here.