Within the scope of the criminal justice system and its machinations is not only the consideration of the legality of issues and the issue of whether or not deeds have violated the established law, but also whether or not the actions in question violate the norms of morality. With both of these considerations in mind, the following future crime scenario is presented for analysis and discussion: A doctor has applied for a patent on new technology involving the use of advanced computers to create a new type of organism.
One of the goals of his research is to genetically alter these organisms for use in human organ growth and transplant. The doctor says that if he is not granted a patent, he intends to continue his research, either in the United States or overseas. Utilizing the above scenario as the basis of the research, this work will address whether this activity is a violation of the law, a deviant act, or none of the above and if this research is an abuse of technology.
The analysis will incorporate relevant academic sources as well as synthesis of the same in order to reach relevant conclusions about the issue at hand. Law Violations versus Deviant Acts The crux of this case is the key consideration of whether the actions of the doctor in this scenario are strictly violations of the established law, deviant acts, and a hybrid of the two misdeeds or none of the above. In order to be able to make such a determination, it is first important to make the determination of a differentiation between law violations, deviant acts, and the point where the two converge.
Being able to consider the legality or illegality of the doctor’s actions necessitates an historic journey back to the original Rule of Law as put forth in such foundational legal documents as the Magna Carta. Essentially, what are the main evaluative criteria when deciding the illegality of an act is whether or not that act goes against the best interests of the public at large, which of course is the basis by which laws are created (Allen, 1996).
Using both the interests of the masses and compliance with established law as the template against which the doctor’s actions will be weighed, in the strictest sense, the doctor does not appear to have broken any laws at this point. His research is ostensibly being conducted with the benefit of humanity at its core, which would give the appearance that he is not breaking the law, strictly speaking. This being understood, however, the determination of whether the actions of the doctor are categorized as deviant is another issue altogether.