Quote:
Originally posted by SleazyDream
Act and intent are just for idiots who want to hold up some unrealistic idea of the world and don't want to be held responsible for their actions.
Every heard of manslaughter? no intent, you still goto jail.
|
1) Act and intent analysis are always used to determine culpability in a rational, civil, and educated society. If that's unrealistic then what do you propose as an alternate standard? Lynchings, mob rule, whoever can scream the loudest, whoever has the most money? Or maybe we can revert to truth finding "analysis" used in the Middle Ages--dunk a guy in water, if he floats, he's guilty. If he doesn't...he's dead...but innocent
2) Yes, I've heard of manslaughter. There is still an intent component, it is lower mens rea requirement--recklessness. This is lower than the MALICE needed for murder. Just because the intent requirement is lower, does not mean there is NO intent requirement. There ARE no intent crimes but these are administrative in nature or infractions that do not apply to homicide.