You have two people and a minor “crime”. You know one is guilty and one is innocent but you don’t know which is which.

Is it better to punish both knowing that you are punishing an innocent? Or should you allow them both to go unpunished knowing you’re letting the guilty party go free?

The latter

Ask one to own up.

Waterboarding?

Or if they’re children electric shocks work well

You ask the two and they genuinely can’t remember who is was at the time.

I would tell both that it will be punishment x2 if neither kid owns up (cos that is 2 crimes then) and if the guilty one owns up then it is only punishment x 1 for the guilty one. I would also point out that to the guilty one that the other kid is unlikely to seek retribution later if they own up now.

That or no puddings etc.

You ask the two and they genuinely can’t remember who is was at the time.

Another lie. Punishment x 3 then.

Take the Patel approach, punish both.

Bring back hanging.

How minor? Are we talking put the wheelie bin out, handles innermost or wearing a hat indoors?
How serious a punishment? No pudding or an actual flogging.

Depends on why your punishing really, to change behaviour? To make you feel better?

So they both know who is guilty?

trial by combat

Collective punishment is for Nazis.

withdraw pudding rights until one of them confesses!

Surely this is ” obstucting the police in the course of their duties” and its time they both fell down some stairs until one confesses. It really doesn’t matter if you get the right one so long as someone ‘fesses up

No children (or pudding) involved. Both adults, genuinely can’t remember who was in charge of the equipment at the time. However, it’s proven that one of them was in charge of said equipment when a rule was unintentionally broken. The rule is there to unsure (edit: ensure) the safety of others but on this occasion, no one was put at risk.

Innocent until proven guilty.

However, it’s proven that one of them was in charge of said equipment when a rule was unintentionally broken.

How can it be if you don’t know which one it was?

Explain to both why the rule is there and the consequences that might have followed.
Both on probationary review as one did it and the other should have spotted them doing it and warned them not to.
Review after X weeks and then let it go

Sounds like a training requirement for both.

unsure the safety of others

Interesting goal?

Agreed, collective punishment is only for fans of totalitarianism so a more nuanced approach is required. That said, it could be worth explaining that an repeats will result in removal of dessert, frozen sausages hammered into lawns or nervous looking dogs somewhere.

Surely there has to be some sort of intent for it to be a crime? Otherwise it’s negligence.

Both should face a highly pedantic and grueling performance improvement plan until someone remembers who dun it.

H&Stretches have consequences for businesses and individuals. Warn both.

Put both of them on the related h&s course.

The Hamilton defence?

https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/4604985.speeding-driver-demands-justice/

You have moved from a moral conundrum to a health and safety issue. Not the same and it needs to be addressed. Training? Refresher courses? A wider issue over the site?

This reminds me of a post I read on SingletrackWorld on 16th July about telling the police who was driving…

I’m guessing this is inspired by the red light camera thread? In that case if it cannot be proven who was driving then it is not reasonable to arbitrarily pick one person who might have been driving and punish them.

Both adults, genuinely can’t remember who was in charge of the equipment at the time. However, it’s proven that one of them was in charge of said equipment when a rule was unintentionally broken.

Can’t remember? They need taking off whatever task they were doing which put them in charge of said equipment and retraining.

If it was kids and at home I’d play it totally different but, from a work aspect where there are health and safety implications I think you have to do something.

Maybe something like getting them (plus whoever else it concerns or may concern in the future) together and have an informal chat about what happened and the reasons it can’t happen again.

The fact that nobody was hurt this time etc should be irrelevant as far as the work place goes.

No real need to come down on anybody heavily, getting the two together with hopefully a few more people is enough to make the individuals concerned a little bit more aware of their actions.

Are you judge, jury and executioner?

#moremoralconundrum

Put both of them on the related h&s course.

This really. How old is their mandatory training, and when did they last do a refresher? Write it up as a near miss, with perhaps a recommendation for a signing-on form, or some sort of card reader on the equipment as a suggestion for improving accountability/safety?  No punishment, unless one steps forward (and even then I’d think about it carefully, prior history etc.)

Is it better to punish both knowing that you are punishing an innocent? Or should you allow them both to go unpunished knowing you’re letting the guilty party go free?

I think it really depends what the “punishment” is. If it’s ‘they can’t have any of your chocolate digestives at tea break’ be ruthless and punish them both. If it’s ‘a wack on the head with a short length of 4X4’ it’s probably best and fairer to first identify the guilty party.

What was the punishment that were considering dispensing?

Trial by combat. The last one standing is innocent.

This has been an interesting thought exercise, thank you all.

I particularly like the comments that suggest group punishment is for Nazis and totalitarian regimes.

@thepurist has cottoned onto what inspired this. I’m somewhat troubled by a comment from someone, who I believe is involved in the justice system, that both parties could be fined.

It reminded me of a story of a city in the UK that has two lion statues rather prominently positioned. I was told one represented liberty and the other justice. If you were to actually measure them, liberty was the larger, dominant lion.

Just curious to know if that’s a principle that still rings true with people. It’s also reassuring to see that a lot of folk are inclined to try the education route rather than enforcement.

I’m somewhat troubled by a comment from someone, who I believe is involved in the justice system, that both parties could be fined.

I wouldn’t be troubled by that – in the legal system thats not going to happen and never will.

When I say troubled by, I don’t mean I scared it might happen, but more that as a society, shouldn’t we all default to innocent till proven guilty (not including HSE).

Is it better to punish both knowing that you are punishing an innocent? Or should you allow them both to go unpunished knowing you’re letting the guilty party go free?

No proof then let both go. You have been defeated. Nothing you can do about it.

slow internet … double post. deleted.

Onzadog – my impression from working alongside police and the like is they get a very jaundiced view of society in general ‘cos all they do all day is deal with scumbags so they think everyone is a scumbag. It colours their perceptions