Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The actor either knew (intended) or deliberately closed his mind to the risk (recklessness) that his action (actus reus) would result in the harm suffered by the victim. The crime of battery, for example, only requires the basic intent that the actor knew or should have known that his action would lead to harmful contact with the victim.
Any legal punishment (other than death) as directed by the court-martial Murder under UCMJ Article 118 Clause (1) or (4) (First Degree Murder) Death (aggravating circumstances), life without parole or life imprisonment with parole after 20 years
Capital punishment – the judicial killing of a human being for crimes. Casualty – death (or injury) in wartime. Collateral damage – Incidental killing of persons during a military attack that were not the object of attack. Democide or populicide – the murder of any person or people by a government.
Punishment can serve as a means for society to publicly express denunciation of an action as being criminal. Besides educating people regarding what is not acceptable behavior, it serves the dual function of preventing vigilante justice by acknowledging public anger, while concurrently deterring future criminal activity by stigmatizing the ...
Mayhem or malicious assault is the intentional dismemberment or disfiguring of a person. Stalking is the repeated observation, following, threatening, or harassing engendering fear of harm. [20] Battery is unconsented bodily contact with another or the intentional use of force against another. Battery is aggravated when using a weapon or ...
Most jurisdictions in the United States of America maintain the felony murder rule. [1] In essence, the felony murder rule states that when an offender kills (regardless of intent to kill) in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime (called a felony in some jurisdictions), the offender, and also the offender's accomplices or co-conspirators, may be found guilty of murder.
Judges normally do not define intention for juries, and the weight of authority is to give it its current meaning in everyday language as directed by the House of Lords in R v Moloney, [1] where can be found references to a number of definitions of intention using subjective and objective tests, and knowledge of consequences of actions or omissions.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED; sometimes called the tort of outrage) [1] is a common law tort that allows individuals to recover for severe emotional distress caused by another individual who intentionally or recklessly inflicted emotional distress by behaving in an "extreme and outrageous" way. [2]