Legal hypothetical: Guilty of one of two crimes

[jack]

Note: I'm merely curious. I have no intention of doing this.

Suppose it's certain that I'm guilty of one of two crimes, but it's uncertain *which*. And there's no overlap. Is there any legal mechanism which will convict me of one-or-the-other? Can I be tried and sentenced to the lesser sentence? What happens?

The best example I can think of is I shoot someone with a hypodermic gun, then send the body abroad in my friend's boat. I'm found with two ampouls, A fatal, B not. If I used A, I'm guilty of murder (and tampering with a corpse, etc). If I used B, I'm guilty of kidnapping (and assault). Can I be convicted of either of the major crimes, given that it's not certain I committed it?

I think in most jurisdictions I can be convicted for assault if I also murder, but if I'm tried for murder that takes precedence. So I might get any lesser charge which certainly happened.

Am I obliged to testify? I thought the current situation in the UK was that it could be held against me if I don't testify, but that it's not automatic guilt, it's just that if it makes me look guilty it can be evidence against me, but here it's not conclusive.

Comments

[the-alchemist.livejournal.com]

I don't think I understand your hypothetical example - can't they just find whoever was shot and see if they're still alive?

How about two identical twins who are clearly seen committing two different crimes at the same time, with no evidence as to which of them did what?

[ewx.livejournal.com]

They try you for kidnapping. Since it's certain you did one or the other you can either admit to it, admit to murder as a defence and promptly get done for that, or hold out for the trial and the jury convict you on that. "I might have murdered him instead" seems unlikely to be convincing...

[rjw76]

I've met a similar one in the case of inseparable Siamese twins, one of whom committed a serious crime. Thankfully, I don't think it's ever happened.