And would their retaliation be considered an act of war?

Isn't that the most humane punishment for criminals?

War is a crime against humanity.

It is sad, yes dreadful. But it carries no guilt.

The attitude of the court toward young criminals is different from its attitude toward adult criminals.

How many would vote not guilty, that what they did was morally permissible?

And why the overwhelming majority of humanity has declared them off limits.

Now, the recession.

And my dad said, Well, yes.

It wasn't an open story, it was much more of a directed story saying to that audience

And then you're going to answer for your crimes against my people.

Iracebeth of Crims, your crimes against Underland are worthy of death.

That all the defendants participated as organizers or accomplices in a common plan or conspiracy to commit crimes against humanity.

With a mobile phone, you can shoot a crime against humanity in Syria.

Kony's the first guy indicted by the ICC The crimes are basically crimes against humanity

Let's hear first from the defense of Dudley and Stephens.

I do my business on this side of the road and you white folks do your business on that side.

They should face a penalty for their crimes.

Human law enforcement will take swift and immediate action against those responsible for this atrocity.

It is a struggle within, a struggle against vice, sin, temptation, lust, greed.

There are many paths to redemption.

Guilty. Guilty.

Secondly, as a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication.

She'll be guilty of murder.

Today, I am declaring the United States of America's first War on Crime.

And that's what that moment with Patricia Schroeder I think shows that if we are to bring about an end to the world's worst atrocities, we have to make it such.

Everyone's against somebody in war.

Now, listen to me.

Eleven guilty, one not guilty.

I won't let this conviction slide.

I think it's I think it is morally reprehensible but I think that there's a distinction between what's morally reprehensible what makes someone legally accountable in other words the night as the judge said what's always moral isn't necessarily against the law and while I don't think that necessity justifies theft or murder any illegal act, at some point your degree of necessity does in fact exonerate you form any guilt. ok. other defenders, other voices for the defense?

To expose and to document the reality and to check it against the media's version.

Not as unlikely as one in 73 million, but nonetheless rather unlikely.

There's the punk on the ground, puddle of blood.

...for your crimes against the Crown.

OK?

He lives just across the road.

This means that the internet is criminalized.

Never play on the road.

Why would you morally exonerate them? What are your reasons?

The innocent has to be surrounded by criminals.

He's cited as the reason Congress is considering the first national crime bill, making criminal enterprise across state lines a federal offense.

The vote is nine to three in favour of guilty.

The old lady thanked me for helping her across the road.

I mean, that thing with the old man, that was pretty unexpected.