Jimmy Frankenstein Case Study

1067 Words3 Pages

Issues 1. Is the clone viewed as a person under the eyes of the law? 2. Under the eyes of the law in Kentucky, is Jimmy Frankenstein guilty of the murder of ‘Billy Bob Frankenstein’ (hereby known as the clone)? 3. Does Jimmy Frankenstein owe the clone a duty of care as his creator, if the clone is recognized as a person? 4. Does Frankenstein’s duty of care extend to the clone if the clone starts to become an individual, even if the two share identical DNA? 5. If the clone is not declared a person, does this mean that as property, Frankenstein has the legal right to damage the clone and dispose of it accordingly? Rules Issue 1: There are no laws in the U.S., or Kentucky, declaring a clone a person, or having the same rights …show more content…

The first part of the definition of murder is intent. In the scenario given, it is stated that Jimmy Frankenstein “told the clone to enter a Plexiglas chamber in the Biology Building… When the clone was enclosed in the chamber, Frankenstein directed a combination of sedative and toxic gases into the chamber until the clone stopped breathing and its heart stopped beating.” This excerpt shows that Jimmy Frankenstein did intend to cause the death of the clone. But this is not murder. The second part of this definition of murder is the murder of a PERSON. As stated above, the state of Kentucky does not consider a clone a person. Under this ruling, Jimmy Frankenstein could not be charged guilty of murder; the situation at hand does not fulfill the two necessary qualifications to convict Jimmy …show more content…

He has the legal right to destroy his own property and dispose of it if he pleases. Under the slave laws of Kentucky, owners were free to kill or harm their slaves if they needed/wanted to because they were considered property. It is the same application with a clone instead of a slave. Also, since Jimmy Frankenstein made the clone, he is not affecting any others. Destroying the clone does not carry any burden on society, nor does it harm anybody. The clone was meant to be a science project; if anyone else were arrested for destroying their science project, we would look down at them as

Open Document