I would have thought that it was obvious that they would have to both go, as the guilty party should not be allowed to get away with the crime. However the argument would be the legality of incarcerating the innocent twin.
A similar question came up on a programme I was watching about Siamese twins that were still joined at the hip I believe, they had a driving licence each but both had deformities. One could operate the car foot pedals and one could steer and operate dash board controls and they passed their test by this method (in the USA), the problem being, should there be an accident, who would be prosecuted!! talk about a bag of worms!! and they both wanted to get married!!!!
I would sat that they would not go to jail, if the courts send them to jail they would be breaking the law for imprisoning an innocent person, but if they released they are breaking no laws, its would be an impossible case to try surely!!
The courts would probably just fix it that they are both guilty or both innocent to save the all the problems!!
There was a case several decades ago in America where 1 siamese twin killed somebody during a fight, and a court let him go free because the judge thought it better to release a guilty man than incarcerate an innocent one. The murderous twin was an alcoholic (the other was teeotal) and eventually died of liver failure. His twin died a few days later.
That is a good question and one which never arrived in my law lectures. When unsure use general principles and moppetshow gave that, which has a precedent given from America which is based on British law.
I hope we haven't given anyone any ideas now as we could have found a route to criminal immunity!
On a tangent many kids are deliberately used to steal as the adults know they are immune from criminal responsibilty. I can imagine the sort of morals they'll end up with.
I was a bit annoyed when I first saw this question, I thought it was tasteless, but actually reading the replies and thinking about it- its a good question/point lol
thats what i was thinking if one did it the other could be done for being an accessory to murder, but on the flip side what if the other was a witness against the one who committed the murder