What is implied by the last sentence?
Most crimes require a guilty mind: to be convicted of theft, one must have meant to take what belonged to another. Strict liability offences dispense with this requirement. A company that sells contaminated food is guilty whether or not anyone intended harm. Critics call this a stain on the criminal law, which should punish only the blameworthy. But the criticism is too sweeping. Strict liability is defensible where the activity is dangerous, the penalty is mild, and the defendant is in a position to prevent the harm by taking care. It is indefensible where a person could be imprisoned for an offence no reasonable care could have avoided. The line between the two is a matter of degree, not of principle.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: D. No simple rule can state exactly where acceptable strict liability ends and unacceptable strict liability begins
- Step 1: 'A matter of degree, not of principle' implies a spectrum without a sharp boundary.
- Step 2: It follows that judgement is needed in each case.
Answer
No simple rule can state exactly where acceptable strict liability ends and unacceptable strict liability begins.
Why not the others: 'Arbitrary' overstates; the author does defend some strict liability and does not propose numerical limits or avoidance of lines.
Practise more Criminal liability.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.