Intentionality plays a role in most criminal definitions. The exceptions are the strict liability cases like statutory rape or DUI (just to name a couple). I th

Intentionality plays a role in most criminal definitions. The exceptions are the strict liability cases like statutory rape or DUI (just to name a couple). I think the law looks to intentions because it's very human to base our judgments on our sense of the person's intent. Beyond me why it developed evolutionally (or if it's just a very recent phenomenon), but we have a soft spot for good intentions. As to the case at hand, I have similar questions. I would think in the U.S. this would have just been a felony murder case where intentions are irrelevant. Agree that a first-degree murder charge in a robbery case would be odd (unless the robbery was a cover story for the planned murder??). As for sports, the pendulum seems to shifted in the other direction with most rules of the 'strict' variety. And I would agree with you that any rule that can be formulated as a strict rule, should be.