"Morality and Human Nature" Law Essay Research Paper

At a citizen review board charged with examining complaints regarding police misconduct, an officer described the reasons why he “planted” evidence to convict a suspect. The officer points out that the suspect reportedly was responsible for the rapes of at least ten pre-adolescent girls. In fact, the suspect’s alleged actions resulted in permanent physical and profound psychological injuries to at least three victims. Regrettably, despite the best efforts of the police, there remained insufficient evidence to arrest, prosecute, and convict the suspect. Everyone on the force knew who was responsible for the crimes and everyone wanted this particular suspect caught. So, in order to prevent future acts of sexual abuse, the officer under review planted blood samples at the latest crime scene. The officer concluded that he felt an obligation and a duty to act this way, given the serious harm the alleged offender had caused several innocent victims.
In this case, to what extent could the officer be said to have a duty to the public? What about a duty to the victims and their families? Did the officer do the “right” thing? Please explain your reasoning.
Thomas Hobbes offers some interesting observations on the reinterpretation of motives . Imagine that a parole officer during the course of his site-visit work confronts a client selling marijuana. The parolee, a mother of three preschool children, lives in poverty. She does not possess a high school diploma and professes to have no marketable skills. Your parolee explains that she sells the drug in order to feed her family and to pay her bills.
Would you take “pity” on this parolee? If so, why? Are they different from those articulated by Thomas Hobbes?