Brandt's specific intent is irrelevant. He held a position of ultimate public trust and sold the key to a critical piece of infrastructure to an unknown criminal entity for cash. The catastrophic outcome was a direct and foreseeable consequence of his reckless greed. A man in his position should have reasonably foreseen that such a security breach could lead to a deadly disaster. We demand a life sentence, stating that he must be held accountable for every life lost.
The Price of a Passcode
A maintenance worker's decision to sell a passcode for personal gain leads to a catastrophic disaster, forcing a judgment on whether to punish the intent or the outcome.
Chapter I: The Account
The Facts
1
A rail technician in severe debt sold a master passcode to an anonymous buyer.
2
The technician believed the act would only cause minor, non-violent disruptions.
3
The buyers were terrorists who used the code to cause a train derailment, killing 158 people.
4
The technician did not share the terrorists' ideology and has expressed profound remorse.
The Full Account
Lars Brandt, a senior maintenance technician for the Royal High-Speed Rail Network, found himself in severe personal debt from a gambling addiction. He was approached online by an anonymous party who offered him a large sum of money for his master maintenance passcode, which would grant temporary, low-level override access to the rail system. Brandt, desperate and believing the buyers were likely corporate rivals intending to cause minor, embarrassing service disruptions, sold the passcode. The buyers, however, were a radical eco-terrorist cell. They used the access to lock a critical track switch, causing the 'North Star' express train to derail at over 200 km/h. The wreck resulted in 158 deaths. The terrorists have claimed responsibility but remain at large, leaving Brandt as the only person in custody.
Chapter II: The Arguments
Accuser:
The Prosecution
Defendant:
Lars Brandt, Senior Maintenance Technician
Lars Brandt is not a mass murderer; he is a foolish and greedy man who made a terrible mistake. The direct cause of death was the terrorist cell. Sentencing him for their actions is unjust. He should be punished severely for the crime he actually committed—selling the passcode—but not for the horrific, independent actions of others. We propose a severe but fixed-term sentence.
Chapter III: Your Deliberation
Should the technician be sentenced based on the crime he intended to commit, or for the full, catastrophic consequences of his actions?
0 deliberating
8 judged