Crime

Crime

Introduction

The purpose of this study is to expand the boundaries of our knowledge by exploring some relevant material relating to the elements of the crime under common law. Definition of the crime can be interpreted on the basis of the existing criminal code. Elements of the crime are general characteristics that distinguish between criminal offenses as a negative social phenomenon from other social phenomena. The crime is a human act prohibited by the law in force at the time of its commission, unlawful criminal offense of the marks prescribed in the law, having a degree of social harm greater than the lesser, is the wrongful act. The definition of material offenses defines us that the social harm of the act is more than negligible. The formal definition of the crime includes all features except social harm. In this paper, the author will examine elements of the crime under historical common law. The author will also elements of the current state statute for that crime and compare how the elements of the crime have changed from the historical common law to the current state statute.

Discussion

Elements of the crime under historical common law

Historically, early common law did not develop the general principles of criminal responsibility. No distinction between criminal lawlessness of the civil law (e.g. the thief answered the same way as the debtor being in default). The crime was only considered as any act (omission), which caused the damage. In its early days, crime was widely regarded a causal relationship between the behavior of the perpetrator and the breakdown effect. The perpetrator is responsible even for the case. Formally accepted the principle of causality (enough to effect any connection with the person of the offender), for example, the owner of the pond was responsible for the death of a drowned man.

With time, a trend to reduce the causality create presumptions, the development of empirical crime was developed. As a rule, it did not consider the guilt of the perpetrator. On the other hand, there are early responsibility (murder case ruled out the possibility of retaliation), expected less responsibility for crimes committed inadvertently, but by chance, were taken into account the circumstances of the offense. The doctrine of humanitarian postulated full criminal responsibility. Representatives of the classical school took as a basis for liability of guilt. The researchers questioned the positivist doctrines of free will of the individual. Anthropological school claimed ...