Problem: Help answer the following question please
What theoretical stance was Christine Mumma utilizing in her decision to obtain DNA from a possible acquaintance of a suspect to free her client? (Formalism, Utilitarian, etc.). Was she using a means justify the end approach or ends justify the means approach? Why would that matter when determining if her actions were ethical?Were her actions ethical to her profession, to her client, to others? Did Mumma violate her professional ethics? Was Mumma right or wrong? Was the ABA correct in finding her responsible but giving her a light sentence?