Immediately afterwards, Dorian fell asleep. Vena tied his hands and feet to the four corners of the bed, and woke him. She said, “Now you are going to be punished for what you have done. I should kill you, but I won’t because I want to make sure that you suffer for the rest of your life.” Using his own knife, she began to cut and jab him with it, planning to torture but not to kill him. She stabbed and blinded him in both eyes, then cut off his sex organs. She also severed the tip of his nose and made a series of cuts across his face and chest.
24. If Dorian is charged with rape, the court should find him
(A) guilty, because he overcame Vena’s refusal to have intercourse with him by threatening to kill her with his knife.
(B) not guilty, because Vena’s demand for twenty dollars made her resistance conditional and therefore less than total.
(C) not guilty, because Vena offered no resistance and Dorian did not use physical force.
(D) not guilty, because of the injuries inflicted by Vena.
25. Assume for the purpose of this Text only that Dorian dies as a result of the injuries inflicted by Vena. Assume further that she is charged with first-degree murder in a jurisdiction which defines that crime as “the unlawful killing of a human being committed intentionally, with deliberation and premeditation.” The court should find Vena
(A) not guilty, because Vena did not intend to cause Dorian’s death.
(B) not guilty, because Vena was acting in self-defense.
(C) guilty, because Dorian’s death resulted from Vena’s commission of a dangerous felony.
(D) guilty, because Dorian’s death resulted from torture.
26. Dingle had suspected for some time that his wife Wilma was unfaithful to him. One night when she came home later than usual, Dingle confronted her, demanding to know where she had been. Tearfully, Wilma confessed that she had been out with a male friend, and that she had sexual intercourse with him. Dingle flew into a rage, striking Wilma repeatedly about the face and head with his clenched fist. The following day, Wilma died as a result of the injuries which Dingle had inflicted. Dingle was subsequently charged with murder. At Dingle’s trial, his attorney asserted that under the circumstances Dingle should not be convicted of any crime more serious than voluntary manslaughter.
Which of the following would be the prosecuting attorney’s most effective argument in response to that assertion?
(A) Dingle’s conduct indicated an intent to kill Wilma.
(B) Dingle’s conduct indicated an intent to inflict great bodily harm on Wilma.
(C) Dingle did not catch Wilma “in flagrante delicto.”
(D) In Dingle’s position, a person of ordinary temperament would not have become angry enough to lose normal self-control.