If one Siamese twin is charged with manslaughter it is not certain how the Supreme Court would rule.
True fact.
For the past two months I have posted random, true facts everyday on my Facebook page. It began, at first when I read an old National Geographic and came across some random, yet entertaining, facts. Like most of the population, when I hear something interesting or funny, I post it on Facebook. After I had posted three or four facts, people kept “liking” and commenting on each one so, naturally, I continued with a new fact every day. Three weeks into this routine, followers started voicing their, “love for my random facts,” and telling me, “they only get on FB to read my status’.” Wherever I went people would ask for random facts or refer to me as, “that fact girl.”
When I arrived at Mesa I decided to expand from Facebook to the whole university by writing in the school newspaper. Each fact is researched and selected based on my opinion of why I think it’s interesting and unique. This week, my interest was sparked by the fact that in the case of manslaughter by one Siamese twin, assuming the other twin posed no knowledge or participation in the act, the Supreme Court has literally no idea what they would do with the innocent twin. There are three options that could be taken into consideration.
One possible course of action is the death penalty, or life without parole (dependent on the jury and the state in which the crime was committed.) The death penalty would ultimately result in the death of both twins as vital organs are shared between the two. Life without parole would constitute as enslaving an innocent man because of the crime his brother did. Both consequences entail destroying America’s basic principles for one court case.
Another method of conviction would be physical separation of the twins. The older the Siamese twins become the harder this process would be to enact. Also, the risks and success rates vary based upon the location in which the twins are conjoined. For most cases the weaker twin is likely to die. Once again this sentencing request puts the life of a guiltless man on the line. The court could give the twins the option of separation. However, the choice would ultimately be up to the twins.
The last punishment the court could bestow on the twins is monetary sanction. This option lets the murderer back into the streets, provided he pays the government money on a weekly/monthly basis. Although this puts criminals back into society, the person is still reprimanded and the innocent man is let free.
If I were the judge on this particular case my sentencing would be monetary sanctions. This penalty is the most appropriate in which America’s stance on freedom is upheld and the innocent man goes free. Although some people may question how this punishment will stop the guilty twin from committing the same crime, intense therapy and regular check-ins from the police department would also need to be required. This fact represents how one court case could destroy America’s basic foundation for justice. I think it’s strange, nothing in this manner has ever presented itself before. Twins can have opposite or similar personalities. Maybe having the other person’s life on the line prevents someone from committing this act, or maybe it’s having someone else constantly there to calm you down or hold you back from making rash decisions. It really makes you think about how life would be with another person 24-7. One thing is for certain, if a case like this ever presents itself in front of the Supreme Court, it will be one of the most controversial and unique cases America has ever seen.

l
Enissen@mavs.coloradomesa.edu