Quote:
Originally posted by G Sharp
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.
|
duuuuu
act, doing a popup.
intent - getting paid to look the other way
__________________
This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog!
Now read without the word dog.
|