3 ms·
Not every crime requires intent; criminal action can occur purely through negligence--you don't have to have or prove criminal intent to get a ticket for runnin
by gambling8nt 17y ago
Not every crime requires intent; criminal action can occur purely through negligence--you don't have to have or prove criminal intent to get a ticket for running a stop sign or in order to get a parking ticket.
- htsh 17y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- gambling8nt 17y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal) For most minor and petty crimes (such as my examples in another comment; parking violations, drunk driving, etc.), mens rea is unneeded (in the US, at any rate). The question of what degree of mens rea is relevant for intellectual property theft is both open and relevant; simply saying that, for example, it should should require mens rea because larceny (theft) does ignores the fundamental differences between the two. EDIT: Two clarifying points. First, there is legal language describing the mens rea necessary in intellectual property theft; however, there is not a significant body of case law interpreting exactly what it means. Second, the reason that you can't just copy the mens rea of larceny is that intent to commit larceny is the intent to deprive the rightful owner of the object, which is clearly not a factor in intellectual property theft.
- htsh 17y agoAgreed. I posted that hastily. I think your posts shed some light on the situation even further, in that usually when you don't need mens rea we're talking of minor or petty crimes.