Pretend that you are a uniquely powerful individual in some sort of parallel universe United States - kinda like Bill Gates, with a personal army (which is legal under the laws of this parallel US - people can have their own armies). You are charged with a particularly heinous crime, but you know that you’re innocent. Nevertheless, you are tried, found guilty, and sentenced to 20 years. 20 years, in a cell, without your wife or kids, without your friends, all for a crime you didn’t commit.
However, you know that because you are uniquely powerful, the government has no way to force you to serve your time. In fact, they wouldn’t even try, because they know that your personal military would wipe out anyone who tried to touch you. If you were to choose to ignore the rule of law, and refuse to serve your time, you would be a free man. This freedom doesn’t apply to anyone else in the nation - only you, because you are, after all, uniquely powerful.
So, do you send yourself to prison for a crime you know you didn’t commit? Why or why not?
Jeff
I would have to be a pretty stupid individual to allow a court find me guilt of a crime I didnt commit when I have resources available comparable to bill gates.
This scenario is done all the time. People are tried in absentia by a court that does not have the power to enforce its rulings. I would opt not to sent myself to jail and find some way to overturn the ruling from a position of freedom. Being in jail serves no purpose if I am innocent, serves me even less if I were guilty.
What about my moral integrity you say? I see no conflict with my character if I were innocent and a court obviously misjudged me. I will make an effort to vindicate my good name.
No way in hell I would serve time for something i didnt do. Furthermore i would consider it a crime to send an innocent person to jail, and that includes myself. I would however continue trying to prove my innocence
Well, I presume in this parallel universe there is a reason unrelated to my safety for having my own army. Otherwise I would probably feel no need to recognize the authority of the government if my own safety required that I fund my own private army.
So, lets assume my billions were made by my company HessianSoft, a business devoted to renting out my armies to other countries. Due to this business, I have several well-trained and well-armed army divisions in my backyard.
Now, for whatever reason, my billions were not enough to prevent a court from finding me guilty.
What do I do?
I would buy my way out. With enough money, everyone from Dan Savage to Phil Donahue would be screaming about the injustice of it all. Every single media outlet in the country would editorialize about how I was framed. I would hold a press conference and say that because I loved this country I will not bow to the will of 12 obviously corrupt jurors, but I will bow to the will of the American people, who are demanding that I not be subjected to such injustice.
Note: A more interesting hypothetical would be one where you don’t have the funds to buy yourself out. In this country money controls the political process, and the fact that you have an army is almost unimportant. Enough money guarantees legal freedom.
The interesting hypothetical is one where your only sphere of control is armed forces. Maybe you are the chief of police of a very large city, or a loved general who controls a significant portion of the army. In either case your troops are all loyal to you, and would defend you if you simply gave the order. You, however, don’t have the funds to make your freedom legal.
But, since that isn’t your hypothetical, I won’t attempt to answer it
If the personal army that you maintain is more powerful than that of the government that you live under, wouldn’t that by definition make you your own de facto nation? That being the case, why would you feel the need to concern yourself with their legal system?
Interesting responses all, though not entirely unexpected. My thoughts are pretty much the same. If I knew I was innocent, I would never turn myself in, but would instead devote serious resources to trying to prove my innocence. If I could never prove it, then oh well - I’ll still die with peace of mind.
The only problems I could forsee would be a breakdown in the rule of law, where the people of the nation (who presumably believed I was guilty) would believe (and somewhat correctly) that I was above the law. While most people would still be forced to behave by virtue of the fact that they weren’t powerful enough to resist the dictates of the government, there would be those who may be powerful enough to resist, and could potentially use my refusal to play the game as their excuse for refusing to go quietly. Possibly, the “greater good” could be served by my going to prison, but that wouldn’t change the fact that I was serving time for something I didn’t do.
Mr2001:
Yes, the current situation with the US vs the UN was the inspiration for this thought experiment, though I recognize it’s not a perfect analogy. You may make any parallels you wish, or just consider this to be its own beast.
Dissonance:
You would… umm… feel the need because… er… it’s a parallel universe where you just do. Yeah, the logic isn’t perfectly sound, but the point was to weigh the relative importance of the rule of law vs the importance of justice. Clearly, when someone goes to prison for a crime they didn’t commit, justice has not been served, even if everything was done strictly by the book, and the person was found guilty.
Jeff
