(Get Answer)

international law discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn. Initial Postings: Read and reflect on the assigned readings for the week. Then post what you thought was the most important concept(s), method(s), term(s), and/or any other thing that you felt was worthy of your understanding in each assigned textbook chapter.Your initial post should be based upon the assigned reading for the week, so the textbook should be a source listed in your reference section and cited within the body of the text. Other sources are not required but feel free to use them if they aid in your discussion Also,provide a graduate-level response to each of the following questions: 1.Explain the concepts of mens rea and actus reus and analyze how they relate to corporate criminal liability. 2.Mike Millionaire is the CEO of Murky Mining, Inc. Mike is not involved in the day-to-day operations of Murky Mining, Inc., and the company has incurred multiple violations under 33 U.S.C. § 1319. Could Mike Millionaire be charged or fined as an officer of the company? Would the fact that Mike Millionaire was not involved in the day-to-day operations of Murky Mining, Inc. be considered? Requirements: Most Important Concepts and Methods of Readings: The "Kingpin Act" is a piece of U.S. legislation that prohibits major international drug traffickers and their associated organizations and agents from using the U.S. financial system or conducting business with U.S. citizens or residents. Many business responsibilities fall under the purview of the Board of Directors. Directors must demonstrate responsibility for overseeing the company's compliance procedures or face personal accountability to shareholders for fraud. It is not a defense to say you had nothing to do with setting up the financial records that people are now legally responsible for. A statement's familiarity can be verified through conversation and interaction with the statement's authors. Actus Without the reus purpose, committing a crime is not enough on its own. Each crime describes the steps that must be taken in order to commit it. Failure to pay taxes is a criminal offence in and of itself, not just the failure to pay the taxes themselves. Crimes Act of 1996; Racketeering Events and Their Repercussions There should be at least two consecutive ones, but three would be preferable. It Crimes that serve as "predicate offences" can be anything from pornography to murder to kidnapping to bribery to extortion to fraud. As a result of the USA Patriot Act, the government has greater access to private companies' records on people's activities. It expands the situations in which the government can search a person's home without their consent. It expands a precedent that had been set, albeit narrowly, for the collection of foreign intelligence data under the Fourth Amendment. Third-party data on individuals' activities may be more accessible to the government thanks to the Patriot Act. With the passage of Section 215 of the Patriot Act, the FBI now has the authority to demand the disclosure of customer information from any business, including medical facilities, bookstores, universities, and internet service providers. Question No 1 Concepts of mens rea and actus reus: The existence of both men's rea and actus reus is required for criminal activity. In common law systems, the word "men's rea" is used to refer to the criminal's intent, rather than the victim's fault. The actus Reus, on the other hand, specifies the concrete steps taken by an individual or group to carry out a criminal conduct. In common parlance, "actus reus" describes the specific act that leads to the victim's harm. In the situation of a robbery when physical force was used, for example, both men's rea and actus Reus would be necessary to find the defendant guilty. To take something from another person with the purpose to utilize it for one's own gain is mens rea. Second, for the thief to be accountable for any damages to the legitimate owner, the thief must have seized actual control of the goods by force known as actus reus. Despite popular belief, corporations still face criminal liability for their deeds. It's possible that the corporation gained anything from an employee's criminal behavior on the job. Hence, if an employee's unlawful acts benefit the firm, the corporation may be held accountable for those actions. This kind of behavior includes things like stealing money, breaking environmental laws, and engaging in insider trading. People who intentionally break the law know full well the consequences of their actions. (Simons, 2022) Question No 2 Mike Millionaire Fined: The mining firm Inc. that everyone loves to hate is totally genuine. A company has its own identity under the law and is subject to its own rules and regulations. In line with civil law remedies, those responsible for wrongdoing are deemed culpable and subject to the appropriate penalty. Mike's financial responsibility is likewise unclear. Any actions taken in Mike's name will be considered his responsibility. Corporations are organizations that have been granted legal status by one or more states to carry on business in that state. These groups operate as autonomous "legal entities." The mining firm that has been under scrutiny recently is a genuine corporation. A corporation has the same legal protections and is subject to the same legal requirements as any other kind of legal body. Independent of its founders, stockholders, and investors is a fair description of the firm. Due to its separate legal status, the corporation is not liable for the personal obligations of its stockholders. The concept of "corporate responsibility" provides a theoretical framework for deciding how much accountability should be placed on a certain corporation. All wrongdoers are tracked down and punished in line with civil law's tenets. Even if Mike should be held accountable, it's not totally obvious that he should. Mike will be responsible for the outcomes of any criminal behaviour carried out under his name. (USEPA, 2019) References: Simons, K. W. (2022). Does punishment for “culpable indifference” simply punish for “bad character”? Examining the requisite connection between mens rea and actus reus. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 6(1), 219-315. USEPA, R. (2019). " Findings of Violation and Order of Compliance: San Pedro Forklift, Inc.: Proceedings under Sections 308 and 309 (a) of the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 USC Sections 1318 and 1319 (a): Docket No. CWA 309 (a)-09-029"| US EPA ARCHIVE DOCUMENT.