Burglar Bob breaks into Vince Victim's house. Bob steals a flat-screen television and laptop and does a significant amount of damage to the property before he leaves. Fortunately, Vince has a state-of-the-art security system. It captures excellent images of Bob, who is soon caught by police. Assume that two legal actions follow, one civil and one criminal. Who will be responsible for bringing the civil case?

Vince will be responsible for the civil case.

Explanation:

When Bob the Burglar broke into Victim Vince’s house, he stole items including a flat-screen TV and a laptop. Along with the theft, Bob the Burglar inflicted a heavy amount of damage on the property. Vince happened to have a security system put in place that was able to capture images of Bob committing the crimes that evening. As a result of the crimes that have been committed by Bob the burglar, there are a few actions that will need to take place so that justice is served. There will need to be a civil lawsuit held between Bob and the Victim Vince as well as a criminal lawsuit between Bob and the state.

The party that is responsible for bringing the civil case to court would be the victim, Vince, and his lawyer.

The likely outcome of the civil trial if the jury believes that Bob is guilty of burgling Vince’s house would be the awarding of money to Vince for damages and pain and suffering that may have been caused because of the crime.

The party that is responsible for bringing the criminal case is the government, which will be the prosecuting party against Bob the Burglar. The outcome of the criminal trial if the jury believes that Bob is guilty of Burgling Vince’s house is jail time and possible fines. Fines that are collected as a result of any criminal cases go straight to the state as opposed to the victim.

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.

aristocracy, timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, theocracy and tyranny

explanation: