Negligence and Unintentional Criminal Conduct

Mental state is a very important factor in many criminal trials. Sometimes the mental state of the defendant can determine whether a crime was committed at all. The technical term of mental state is ‘mens rea’. The idea behind this important term is that only those who deserve blame and punishment because of their intentions and morals should be convicted of a crime. Intentionally engaging in criminal conduct is therefore worthy of appropriate sentences such as jail and fines. Although this is an important concept behind the criminal justice system, it is unlikely that you will ever hear it in a criminal court. In the right situation, your criminal attorney will simply defend you based on a specific mental state and argue that you were not criminally responsible for your actions.

Criminal Negligence
Carelessness as the result of an accident is not usually considered a criminal act. However, in certain situations it is criminal when the defendant is reckless or criminally negligent. Recklessness is considered criminal when the individual ignores a substantial risk to other people or property. A good example of this kind of recklessness would be in an accident where someone is killed or severely injured as the result of drunk driving. Ignoring the risks of drinking and driving would be considered reckless.

Criminal negligence is similar to reckless behavior, but concentrates more on a willful omission. When criminal negligence occurs the person often completely disregards a significant risk that has a high probability of severe injury or death. This can occur because of negligence in surgery or even as the result of some type of important responsibility such as lifeguarding. If a lifeguard were to ignore a drowning victim, they could be charged with criminal negligence.

Intentional and Unintentional Criminal Conduct
Committing an illegal act does not always mean that someone is legally responsible for their actions. The mental state of person may determine that although they have done something wrong, they misperceived the situation. This is also known as ‘mistaking the fact’. For example, someone might temporarily detain another person by holding them down because they honestly believed that they were about to cause injury to a third party. Even though they might be mistaken, it is possible that it would not be considered unlawful imprisonment or assault simply because they were genuinely trying to protect another.

A similar lack of responsibility can occur when someone is in a mental state that cannot properly distinguish between the ideas of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ when they are committing a crime. Although the act may be intentional, they may not entirely understand its consequences. The two common types of mental states that reflect this idea include infancy and insanity.

On the other hand, if the act is committed intentionally but the individual simply did not know it was illegal, then they are likely to be held criminally responsible. It is not considered excusable to commit a criminal act only because the person did not know they were breaking the law. Such a situation might occur if an individual possessed a controlled substance but did not know that it was illegal.