Abstract
This essay compares and contrasts the philosophies of objectivism and subjectivism in deterimining criminal liability. It examines the evolution of the objective standard for determining the concept of 'mens rea' , mental culpablity, the evolution of the subjective standard for establishing the requirement for a knowing belief that an act is criminal, and recent developments in legislative actions codifying the objective standards in sexual assault cases.

From the Paper
"Subjectivism is the philosophy that our knowledge is shaped by our perception, where Objectivism is the converse where what we perceive is independent of what our perception is of them. (faithnet.org) Translating these conflicting philosophies to criminal liability requires two more definitions. First is the concept of mens rea (Latin: a guilty mind) defined as guilty knowledge and willfulness. (Black 1979) This is the legal requirement for liability for willful acts where the perpetrator of the criminal act must have knowledge that what he is doing is wrong or illegal. Common law murder is defined as the intentional killing of a..."

Tags:objectivism, subjectivism, crime

Abstract
This paper discusses the philosophies of subjectivism and objectivism as they apply to criminal liability. It begins by defining each philosophy. It then presents examples of past cases and discusses how subjectivism or objectivism applies to them. The paper also looks at the history of British common law and how subjectivism and objectivism came into play in determining guilt or innocence.

From the Paper
"The objective standard is now changing to the subjective. In the case of B. v. the Director of Public Prosecutions (2000) 1 All ER 833, is a recent example of the shift. In B. the defendant is 15 year old boy accused of incitement of a child under 14 to gross indecency. The young man was sitting on a bus next to a 13 year old girl, he repeatedly requested that she perform sexual acts with him, and she refused all of his advances. The original intent of the legislation would make this a strict liability crime, where the mere commission of the offense would incur criminal liability, actus reus. Using the previous standard for specific intent crimes established in Morgan, a reasonable standard would be applied to determine criminal liability of the boy. With the decision in B. the court now has established an objective standard. Lord Steyn in his opinion stated, "There has been a general shift in from objectivism to subjectivism in the branch of the law."

Tags:guilt, innocence, legislation, court

Abstract
This paper offers definitions of both objectivism and subjectivism. The paper examines the highly controversial Caldwell case of the early 1980s that can be seen as a prime example of what pulls the British judiciary in competing directions. The paper also looks at the legal concept of "impossible attempts" and its relationship to both subjectivism and objectivism. The paper then shows how the area of the criminal law dealing with physical assault and battery is a good example of how subjectivism and objectivism continue to grapple over legal terrain. The paper concludes that neither approach is entirely without shortcomings, but each approach is certain to gain ascendancy at different times in the future.

From the Paper
"It is generally true that drawing a distinction between the "subjective" and the "objective" is not a particularly easy matter. For example, if the law courts attempt to justify an ascription of recklessness by arguing that someone did not notice an "obvious" risk chiefly because they did not care about that risk and what it might mean for others - a "subjective" position British courts have taken in the past - then they are obviously applying some kind of normative (objective) standard to the matter. Of course, the confusion about what is really subjectivism and what is really objectivism cries out for a definition of both. To wit, subjectivism - broadly stated - believes that "action-ascriptions" which generate criminal liability should be determined solely by looking at what the individual's intentions and beliefs were at the time of the offense. On the other hand, the objectivist camp believes that someone's actual intentions are irrelevant to whether or not they are criminally liable: instead, proponents of objectivism cleave to the view that what actually occurred trumps any intentions or non-intentions the perpetrator might have had."

Tags:Caldwell, case, jurisprudence, criminal, liability, perpetrator, defendant, conviction

Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to discuss criminal liability and professional requirements for physicians, with a special focus on the requirements in Tennessee. Within this paper, the writer covers four areas: - Identify the civil complaint process for patients/consumers to use in the event of suspected professional misconduct or incompetence. - Explore the role of the respective regulatory agencies in investigating such allegations and determining and applying appropriate disciplinary action, if any. - Identify any potential criminal liability that could result to the health care professional relative to abuses perpetrated in practices involving these procedures, as well as professional misconduct. - Ascertain the process that would be followed in the event that criminal charges were to be filled for the described criminal behavior.

Tags:liability, physician, tennessee

Abstract
This paper analyzes and examines the various issues related to corporate criminal liability. Executives and managers may be criminally prosecuted as individuals for the actions of their businesses, even if they neither knew about nor had any role in the crime. Thus, executives and managers may be sentenced to jail time simply for company violations that occurred on their watch. This paper discusses some of the applicable case law and statutes with examples from real life cases and then outlines how executives and managers may avoid or minimize their risk of criminal liability. It concludes with recommendations for improving corporate ethics.

From the Paper
"Criminal prosecution of executives and managers for the actions of their businesses sharply increased during the 1960s and again in the 1980s after the junk bond and Savings and Loan scandals erupted. Various factors contributed to the rise in criminal prosecution of executives and managers for the actions of corporations. First, prosecutors became much more willing to take action against individual managers for criminal offenses by their businesses. Second, both Congress and the states incorporated criminal penalties for responsible individuals into an increasing number of regulatory statutes. Third, courts became more willing to interpret these statutes as public welfare legislation and to hold businesses and their executives and managers strictly liable for the consequences of a violation."

Tags:scandals, criminal, ethics, scandals, prosecution

Abstract
In this article, the writer describes the process of regulating medical doctors in Arizona, along with an overview of the criminal and civil proceedings that can be levied against physicians believed to have behaved wrongfully.

From the Paper
"Like other States, Arizona faces both a chronic shortage of registered licensed certified and vetted health care professionals including physicians nurses pharmacists and practitioners of the various therapies as well as the necessity of ensuring that such professionals are properly regulated and licensed to ensure their competency for practice. A major cause for concern according to experts is that among physicians specialization is becoming increasingly commonplace leaving significant gaps in the ranks of family physicians or general ..."

Tags:law, crime, physicians, Arizona, medical malpractice, regulation

Abstract
In this article, the writer considers issues associated with four factors that are affected by the regulation of health professionals in California.

From the Paper
"Professions associated with the healing arts are highly regulated in California. The regulations affect providers patients and institutions. This paper considers issues associated with four factors that are affected by the regulation of health professionals in California. The four factors are the civil complaint process, the role of regulator agencies in the investigation of civil complaints, the determination of criminal liability and the process involved in filing criminal charges. The specific focus ..."

Tags:nursing, California, criminal liability, regulation, civil complaint

Abstract
The paper explains that consent refers to a person engaging in an action having been informed of the dangers and risks associated with the action, but voluntarily chooses to take part in a particular action that maybe harmful. The paper looks at a case where the defendant is not criminally liable for the damage, for example, in many hospitals, doctors tell the patients of the necessary risk associated with certain medical procedures and even give patients the probability of survival. The paper explains that if a patient consents to this activity then the hospital or doctor is not criminally liable.

From the Paper
"Criminal liability is the idea that elements of a crime need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and should be proven to have been committed by the defendant(s). Ideally, the degree of liability should be the violation of the criminal law less any defense or mitigation, but there are many issues that will not make this relationship as direct as the formula above shows - Degree of liability = violation of the criminal law - defense or justification mitigation. That is, the degree of liability depends on many facets that will not make this relationship as direct as the equation above."

Tags:criminal, law, crime