Incarcerable

The adjective 'incarcerable' describes a person, action, or situation that is worthy of or liable to imprisonment. It indicates a state where legal and societal norms deem confinement as a justifiable consequence. This encompasses a wide range of offenses, from severe crimes like murder and kidnapping to less severe, but still serious, transgressions such as embezzlement or tax evasion. The determination of whether an action is 'incarcerable' is heavily dependent on the specific legal jurisdiction and the details of the act itself. The severity of the potential sentence often depends on the jurisdiction's sentencing guidelines and the judge's discretion. The core implication is that the act justifies the removal of freedom.

Incarcerable meaning with examples

• The defense attorney argued the client's actions, while unethical, were not demonstrably 'incarcerable' offenses, emphasizing the lack of direct intent to cause significant financial harm. The prosecution countered, citing precedence and highlighting the deliberate nature of the fraudulent activities. The jury deliberated, focusing on the definitions presented and the evidence to decide whether to deem the defendant 'incarcerable' or not. They carefully reviewed the evidence presented.
• Given the violent nature of the attack and the defendant's history of similar offenses, the judge considered the defendant's actions 'incarcerable'. The sentencing phase involved assessing mitigating factors and arguments from both sides, while the prosecution focused on the public safety issues. The decision hinged on the question of appropriate punishment and the possibility of rehabilitation of this individual. The judge's decision was expected with tension.
• Following the company's fraudulent dealings and the losses sustained by investors, the key executives faced the possibility of 'incarcerable' charges. The case involved complex financial transactions and the determination of the intent to defraud. The legal team strategized, weighing their options including plea bargaining to mitigate penalties. The court was expected to weigh the evidence and decide on the best course of action. The case took a long time.
• The judge considered the defendant's actions 'incarcerable' as they violated environmental regulations and caused significant damage to local habitats, thereby endangering public health. Experts were called to testify, and the evidence presented was weighed. The defense attempted to minimize the impact, while the prosecution pushed for a more severe sentence for the transgressor, which would involve potential imprisonment. The judge listened to the evidence.
• Based on the evidence, the jury found the defendant's behavior 'incarcerable', citing the theft of sensitive government documents. The sentencing phase involved arguments on the defendant's character, the harm caused, and the potential impact on national security. The court considered the potential for plea bargains to influence the final sentence. The ultimate decision rested on whether the individual's actions warranted imprisonment. The jury was very involved.