Strict Liability and Criminal behavior



Abstract

In law the liability constitutes a situation in which the person may be responsible for an offense even though this does not derive directly from his behavior and not due to willful misconduct or fault of the subject. This situation is an exception to the general principle of responsibility and subsequent confirmation in the philosophical system of natural law so that they may be obliged attributed to the legal consequences. In line with the development of legal and economic relationships, the last century has felt the need to invoke a responsibility occurrence distinct from the classical from behavior and it went well to form in the social consciousness a new concept of liability based on a general and generic principle of equity. According to which it is right that those who draw benefits from its unique position to respond to any possible disadvantages. The liability is a type of liability that occurs independently of any fault of the person responsible. If subjective liability is based solely on the existence of fault on the part of a subject, strict liability does not require such requirement. For example, in the case of the Civil Code, it allows a state to require compensation to the owner of a tree for damage caused by the accidental fall of a branch of the same on the head of a passer, even in the case in which the owner has been diligent and often pruned the tree, it is said that its liability is strict.

Strict Liability and Criminal behavior

Introduction

In criminal law, the term 'strict liability' refers to the liability for which 'guilty mind' or mens rea need not be proved with relation to a single element or many elements that comprise the guilty act or actus reus. This may be the case even when a certain degree of knowledge, recklessness or intention is required in connection with other elements of the offense. The liability is defined as being 'strict' mainly for the fact that the defendant will be convicted and forced to stand trial even when they were honestly ignorant of factors that would categorize their omissions or actions as being criminal in nature. Therefore, the defendant would not be judged guilty since there would not even be criminal negligence which is the least blameworthy level of mens rea.

Discussion

The liability is a type of liability that occurs independently of any fault of the person responsible. If subjective liability is based solely on the existence of fault on the part of a subject, strict liability does not require such requirement. For example, in the case of the Civil Code allows a state to require compensation to the owner of a tree for damage caused by the accidental fall of a branch of the same on the head of a passer, even in the case in which the owner has been diligent and often pruned the tree, it is said that its liability is strict. In strict liability, the liability of an individual exists ...