# A Criminal, Cloned. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 16, 2009, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674 "2009-01-16T23:31:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sr\_Siete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6de8d8/32.png) [@Sr\_Siete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sr_Siete)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/21 "2009-01-17T01:25:30Z")
Hey! I’ve seen this movie! No, only the original Jean Claude Van Damme would be tried. ---
**Author:** ![Indistinguishable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/90ced4/32.png) [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/22 "2009-01-17T01:28:24Z")
We do not have, in our society, a convention for continuity of identity which covers such situations, no doubt because we’ve never had to deal with them. But it’s not as though there’s some external metaphysical truth of the matter out there for us to hope to find and appreciate; it’s up to us to set our own conventions. This is an area where no line exists, so to speak, and it is up to us to draw or not draw one as we like. There’s not some already set Right Answer; we’re free to pick any answer we like, and deal with the consequences which result from applying it. As a legal issue, such a case _would_ result in some rocking of foundations and redeciding of established principles. No biggy; it’s to be expected from a change in possibilities of that magnitude. But there’s no way existing law simply gets applied directly to the case without some overturning of precedent. It just wouldn’t happen. As a purely philosophical issue, this is also unsettled ground, _so far as the question of identity goes_ (which may be settled by simply dissolving the matter, and agreeing there is no longer any point in pretending just one or the other is the genuine embodiment of the pre-cloning individual. Indeed, the more the clones become symmetrical in all properties, the more this is likely to be the adopted convention). As far as the ethics of punishment go, however, it may be easy enough to simply decouple them from the question of identity and apply existing principles straightforwardly. It depends on whether we motivate punishment of the crime as purely punitive (i.e., there is a moral imperative to punish because criminals _deserve_ punishment, regardless of whether this accomplishes anything of external value), or as primarily done for protection of others and/or rehabilitation of the criminal. In the latter case, as already noted, there is no reason to object against simply punishing both. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/23 "2009-01-17T19:43:11Z")
> [@A question for logical Mormons in the know.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-question-for-logical-mormons-in-the-know/50497/119): > > In the case present here, it seems intuitively obvious that only one of them did the deed, thus only one of them is culpable. However, what if we made the copy, and then destroyed the original? This was my problem in thinking about it. Trying to seperate the guilt into just one, I could only come up with a method of physicality; they have the same minds, motivations, memories and so on, so the difference must lie in that it was not that particular version that did the deed. But by that logic, killing the original destroys the guilt, and what’s more if instead of a copy the mind is transferred into the clone, likewise it could be argued that the guilt is gone too, as the physicality is just as different. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/24 "2009-01-18T08:17:24Z")
> [@Sr\_Siete](#): > > Hey! I’ve seen this movie! > No, only the original Jean Claude Van Damme would be tried. Actually, there was another fictional example - TNG’s Thomas Riker, created in a transporter accident and exact double, including memories, of William T. Riker (_Second Chances_). In one of the _Nitpicker_ books, Phil Farrand questions the events in the later episode _The Pegasus_, in which William Riker is charged for a crime that took place early in his career, and wonders if Thomas should be charged as well. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/25 "2009-01-18T09:16:03Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > The criminal should be tried and the machine that resembles him should be destroyed. Since the OP was unclear on this point, it’s easy to imagine that we’re talking about the matter-transporter/replicator-creates-two-copies scenario, in which case there is no argument to make that either individual is the actual criminal. In neither case is there a ‘machine.’ Either way, since the identity of the perpetrator is common in both individuals through the point of the criminal act, it seems the only sensible path is to charge both individuals identically, though obviously law would have to evolve to cope with this possibility. ---
**Author:** ![Rigamarole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/77aa72/32.png) [@Rigamarole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rigamarole)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/26 "2009-01-18T09:31:15Z")
I believe the answer is to take the man’s baby and propose that he be cut in half, each half given to one of the men. At that point only the real father, and thus the real criminal, will protest. ---
**Author:** ![Sandwich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/22d042/32.png) [@Sandwich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sandwich)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/27 "2009-01-18T10:04:47Z")
This is too easy. Both replicants are destroyed without trial. Neither has any legal or constitutional rights. (You weren’t expecting a cite to statute and established precedent for this were you?) ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/28 "2009-01-18T10:20:11Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > What you have constructed is not a clone. Cloning would create an identical twin baby of the donor. Cloning doesn’t create an identical physical copy of someone, it creates a new person who isn’t a copy. It certainly doesn’t create an adult. > > But even if you could create an adult clone, implanting someone else’s memories into that other person wouldn’t make them the first person. Suppose the criminal captured you, and implanted his memories into you. You might believe yourself to be the criminal, but you wouldn’t be. I would imagine that altering another person’s memories this way would be a crime almost as bad as murder. > > If you want to talk about a Star Trek style replicator that produces an exact copy of the criminal, then you’ve got a different situation. Neither is a copy, both are originals. spoilsport ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/29 "2009-01-18T11:41:48Z")
> [@Sandwich](#): > > This is too easy. Both replicants are destroyed without trial. Neither has any legal or constitutional rights. (You weren’t expecting a cite to statute and established precedent for this were you?) No one’s expecting established precedent here, but seriously - you think in some hypothetical future where we still live under the US Constitution or something like it that the first time this comes up, courts would deny personhood to an otherwise indistinguishable human being who happened to have had his atoms assembled via a replicator? ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/30 "2009-01-18T15:12:24Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > No one’s expecting established precedent here, but seriously - you think in some hypothetical future where we still live under the US Constitution or something like it that the first time this comes up, courts would deny personhood to an otherwise indistinguishable human being who happened to have had his atoms assembled via a replicator? Mad science would have a field day if this were so. “Hahahaha! My CHON replicator has scrambled the positions of every atom of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen on Earth, while preserving isotope ratios in given samples! The world has been replicated! Your law is null and void!” ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/31 "2009-01-18T17:23:55Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > Mad science would have a field day if this were so. > > “Hahahaha! My CHON replicator has scrambled the positions of every atom of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen on Earth, while preserving isotope ratios in given samples! The world has been replicated! Your law is null and void!” I guess maybe, but is your point that such a future is so dissimilar from our present that it’s impossible to imagine what would happen? Because I think that might kind of ruin the fun of the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/32 "2009-01-18T21:55:19Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > Mad science would have a field day if this were so. > > “Hahahaha! My CHON replicator has scrambled the positions of every atom of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen on Earth, while preserving isotope ratios in given samples! The world has been replicated! Your law is null and void!” Or you could just build an exact double of Earth out of papier-mâché. Better start subscribing to all the newspapers in the world to get free raw materials. ---
**Author:** ![appleciders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85f322/32.png) [@appleciders](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/appleciders)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/33 "2009-01-18T22:03:49Z")
> [@Hello\_Again](#): > > Dreaming of stabbing your mother in law is not a crime, no matter **hoe** real it seems. (bolding mine) Did anyone else read this and crack up? ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/34 "2009-01-18T22:37:14Z")
> [@appleciders](#): > > (bolding mine) > > Did anyone else read this and crack up? LOL! ---
**Author:** ![shijinn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@shijinn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shijinn)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/35 "2009-01-19T10:11:57Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > … Should _both_ men be tried for the crime? tried? no. all existing clones will be ‘deleted’ and the disposition to commit the crime patched up before creating new ones from saved states some time before the hypothetical. in the mindset of a world where people use teleporters freely it is pointless to do anything to just a copy of a person and ignore the other copies. ---
**Author:** ![CutterJohn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/91b2a8/32.png) [@CutterJohn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CutterJohn)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/36 "2009-01-19T18:13:19Z")
Of course. Though they are two distinct individuals now, they were the same person when the act was committed, and hence, both committed the crime. The fact that the meat of one of them didn’t actually do it is irrelevant, since his mind did. A man receives his doctorate, then, later that day, clones himself and his memories. Is the clone a doctor too? Or will he have to do his own dissertation? If the criminal clone can’t be prosecuted, then the doctor clone can’t be a doctor, and attempting to turn in the dissertation that he wrote will be considered plagiarism. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/37 "2009-01-19T20:48:51Z")
> [@Hello\_Again](#): > > Crime = _mens rea_ (guilty mind) + _actus rea_ (guilty act) > No act, no crime, just bad thoughts. Dreaming of stabbing your mother in law is not a crime, no matter hoe real it seems. The clone is the dreamer, who distinctly recalls something he did not do. So, let’s assume we have a serial killer with access to a duplicator machine. His MO is to kill someone, duplicate himself, then destroy the original. To make it even harder, he’s set up the machine to automatically kill the original, so that entering the duplicator is a form of suicide, and the “clone” doesn’t have any blood directly on his hands. Until he goes out, kills another victim, and re-duplicates himself. How do you prosecute this? ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/38 "2009-01-19T21:41:05Z")
Follow criminal to where the cloning machine is located. When clone goes out to kill, steal machine. Prosecute clone after next killing. ---
**Author:** ![Folly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folly/32/3219_2.png) [@Folly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folly)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/39 "2009-01-19T23:11:16Z")
> [@Rigamarole](#): > > I believe the answer is to take the man’s baby and propose that he be cut in half, each half given to one of the men. At that point only the real father, and thus the real criminal, will protest. And therefore the real father will be entitled to _most_ of the baby. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674/40 "2009-01-20T18:09:46Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > …I would say yes, both of them can and _should_ be arrested for the crime. The point of prison is to get dangerous people off the street; if the clone is functionally identical to the original he is, indisputably, an equal danger to society. I have a lot of sympathy for this point of view, but while that may be the point of _prison_, it is not the point of the criminal law. The point of the criminal law is to see that justice is done, that the guilty are punished, that the innocent are vindicated, and that individual rights are respected. The copy has committed no crime; the original did. The original should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, but the copy cannot be, unless and until the law changes to permit (or even require) it. And since the Constitution prohibits ex post facto criminal legislation, this particular copy would, IMHO, be off the hook. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-criminal-cloned/481674.md?page=1)