Chapter 4

Front 1

“but for” cause

Back 1

cause in fact (also called sine qua non cause); the actor’s conduct sets in motion a chain of events that, sooner or later, leads to a result; see factual (“but for”) cause.

Front 2

mens rea

Back 2

the “state of mind” the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt; criminal intent from an evil mind; the mental element in crime, including purpose, knowledge, recklessness, and negligence.

Front 3

attendant circumstances

Back 3

a circumstance connected to an act, an intent, and/or a result required to make an act criminal.

Front 4

blameworthiness (also called “culpability”)

Back 4

the idea that we can only punish people who we can blame, and we can only blame people who are responsible for what they do.

Front 5

causation

Back 5

requirement that criminal conduct cause a harm defined in the criminal code.

Front 6

cause in fact

Back 6

the objective determination that the defendant’s act triggered a chain of events that ended as the bad result, such as death in homicide.

Front 7

concurrence

Back 7

the requirement that actus reus must join with mens rea to produce criminal conduct or that conduct must cause a harmful result.

Front 8

culpability

Back 8

blameworthiness based on mens rea; deserving of punishment because of individual responsibility for actions.

Front 9

defense of excuse

Back 9

defenses based on the idea that what the defendant did was a crime but under the circumstances he wasn’t responsible for what he did (insanity).

Front 10

factual (“but for”) cause

Back 10

conduct that, in fact, leads to a harmful result.

Front 11

failure-of-proof theory (defense)

Back 11

defendant disproves the prosecution’s case by showing he or she couldn’t have formed the state of mind required to prove the mental element of the crime.

Front 12

general intent crime

Back 12

intent to commit the actus reus—the act required in the definition of the crime.

Front 13

general intent plus

Back 13

“general intent” refers to the intent to commit the actus reus of the crime and “plus” refers to some “special mental element” in addition to the intent to commit the criminal act.

Front 14

intervening cause

Back 14

the cause that either interrupts a chain of events or substantially contributes to a result.

Front 15

knowledge (in mens rea)

Back 15

consciously acting or causing a result.

Front 16

legal (proximate cause)

Back 16

the main cause of the result of criminal conduct.

Front 17

legal cause

Back 17

a subjective judgment as to whether it’s fair and just to blame the defendant for the result; cause recognized by law to impose criminal liability.

Front 18

liability

Back 18

the technical legal term for “responsibility.”

Front 19

motive

Back 19

the reason why a defendant commits a crime.

Front 20

negligence

Back 20

the unconscious creation of substantial and unjustifiable risks.

Front 21

objective fault

Back 21

requires no purposeful or conscious bad mind in the actor; it sets a standard of what the “average person should have known.”

Front 22

principle of causation

Back 22

requirement that criminal conduct cause a harm defined in the criminal code.

Front 23

principle of concurrence

Back 23

some mental fault has to trigger the actus reus in criminal conduct crimes and the cause in bad-result crimes; see concurrence.

Front 24

proximate cause

Back 24

the main cause of the result of criminal conduct; legal cause.

Front 25

purpose (in mens rea)

Back 25

the specific intent to act and/or cause a criminal harm.

Front 26

purposely

Back 26

acts taken for the very aim of engaging in conduct or causing a criminal result.

Front 27

recklessness

Back 27

the conscious creation of substantial and unjustifiable risk.

Front 28

specific intent

Back 28

the attitude represented by subjective fault, where there’s a “bad” mind or will that triggers the act; the intent to do something beyond the actus reus.

Front 29

strict liability

Back 29

liability without fault, or in the absence of mens rea; it’s based on voluntary action alone.

Front 30

subjective fault

Back 30

fault that requires a “bad mind” in the actor.

Front 31

superseding cause

Back 31

the cause that relieves from responsibility (liability) the party whose act started the series of events which led to the result because the original conduct is no longer the proximate cause.