An Analysis of Piracy Crimes - Essay Example

The grand jury presenting the accused was called and sworn in. The charge for Joseph Dawson, Edward Forseith, William May, [brace] William Bishop, James Lewis, and John Sparkes was read by High court judge, Sir Sc Hedge (Dawson, p. 3-7). On the other hand, the witnesses for the kings were sworn in whereby, the Grand Jury withdrew and returned back afterward and the case proceeded (Dawson, p.3-5).

An analysis of trials for several crimes committed

            Five men were found guilty namely John sparks, William Bishop, William May, Edward Forseith, and James Lewis. This is because the five men participated directly or indirectly in piracy crime (Dawson, p. 24-26).On the other hand, Joseph Dawson was considered innocent because he was not on board, unlike other culprits who witnessed the crime and decided to remain quiet (Dawson, p. 24-26). Additionally, the judges considered group involvement to commit a felony as complicity whereby, a syndicate or a group of gangs located in different locations whether on the sea or on the land corporate to commit a felony (Dawson, p. 23-27). The result of poor circumstances may be attributed to the lack of a comprehensive structure that defines the rimes of piracy crime (Dawson, p. 24-26).

            In the above connection, judge Charles Hedge an expert in law defined the crime of piracy as robbery of the sea whereby, sea bandits hijacked captains, ships, and cargo on board and take cargo and money. This crime may include all crimes but is not limited to those committed on air, land, internet, and water bodies (Dawson, p. 18-25). Additionally, the crime of piracy may involve unlawful acts or attempts to steal from pirates both from the water bodies and even outside the sea (Dawson, p. 18-25). On the other hand, the defense attorney asserted that their clients did not commit any acts of piracy because they did not forcefully rob or removed anything of value from the ship. Therefore, their acts were not within the scope of piracy crime as defined by the judge (Dawson, p. 22-24).

            Additionally, future lawyers should focus on the actual structure and organization of a pirate trial. This is because, the structures, in this case, were not specific, and therefore, those who were guilty went unpunished. This could have been prevented if there was a specific structure (Dawson, p.30-58).In the above connection, piracy maybe compare to other sins in terms of jurisdictions applied to both sins and the place of happening (Dawson, p.16-25). It can be scrutinized that both piracy crimes and other sins have a linear correlation in terms of jurisdiction applied by the court. This is because both types of crimes may be committed on land, sea, air, or even virtually (Dawson, p.16-25).

Conclusion

            Based on the above analysis it can be scrutinized how various piracy crimes were committed and how the judge defined piracy crime. Additionally, it can be observed how defendants tried to prove themselves innocent before the judge after being aligned in court. However, five men were found guilty while one man was found innocent of piracy crime. Conclusively, piracy crime has been compared with other sins to see whether there was a correlation between piracy crime and other sins.