correctly, the accused will always be held responsible for any injury caused by an unknown condition, or in this case, belief. Robert Blaue was to be sentenced for counts one and two against him, which would be manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility (Court) and wounding with the intent to do grievous bodily harm (ROBERT). He was also sentenced separately for the third, fourth, and fifth counts he had also accumulated. These counts included one count of indecent assault against Regina, and two additional counts of indecent assault from two other unrelated accounts (ROBERT). On July 9th, 1975, Robert Konrad Blaue was officially convicted and sentenced (ROBERT). Robert was sentenced to life in prison for the counts of manslaughter and wounding with intent to harm (Court). He was also sentenced an extra twelve months of prison for his three counts of indecent assault (Court). Most would agree that two lifetime’s in prison is a satisfactory punishment for what Blaue had done, but the extra twelve months added to that sure would not hurt. …show more content…
This would be a tough choice for anyone, especially a young girl who might not have even known where she fit into her own life yet, let alone her religion. Regina may not have ever known where she would have fit into her own society, but she definitely fits into the society of law, to prove that there is justice for people who choose to live their life on their own terms. So, in the case of Regina vs. Blaue, there is no real winner, only justice served, and lessons