โ Scribed by Michael D. Bayles
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
This paper explores analyzing criminal responsibility from the Humean position that blame is for character traits. If untoward acts indicate undesirable character traits, then the agent is blameworthy; if they do not, then the actor is not blameworthy -he has an excuse. A distinctive feature of this approach is that the voluntariness of acts is irrelevant to determining blameworthiness.
This analysis is then applied to a variety of issues in criminal law. Mens rea supports inferences to character traits, and the Humean approach prorides a reason for rejcting strict criminal liability. The Humean approach also helps resolve a number of issues about attempts, such as punishment for impossible attempts and the defense of abandonment. It also supports the broad outlines of the defense of mistake and provides a third alternative in the Wooton-Hart debate over punishment and treatment.
This paper explores criminal responsibility -mens rea and excuses from a perspective quite different from that in most recent writing. Philosophical literature provides three general theories of blame and excuses largely stemming from Bentham, Kant, and Hume. The Kantian type of view predominates in recent literature, with the utilitarian view being the only other one usually considered. This paper explores a Humean theory of blame and excuses for criminal responsibility. Although a more detailed analysis would be necessary for a complete justification of the Humean approach, this paper argues for its plausibility and general compatibility with the current law.
The utilitarian theory of criminal responsibility stems from Bentham. His rationale for excuses, as opposed to other reasons for not punishing, is that punishment would be inefficacious, that is, could not deterJ This general rationale, he thought, would
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
This article addresses why mental disorder is relevant to criminal responsibility. It begins by considering the meaning of criminal responsibility because it is impossible to understand the relevance of mental disorder unless one understands responsibility clearly. The next section provides a theore
This paper reviews the law related to voluntary intoxication and criminal responsibility in the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, the US Virgin islands, and Puerto Rico. Statutory and case law citations are provided which govern the use of intoxication evidence in each jurisdiction to nega