NCJ Number
100306
Journal
Canadian Journal of Criminology Volume: 27 Issue: 4 Dated: (October 1985) Pages: 455-465
Date Published
1985
Length
11 pages
Annotation
Two studies were conducted to examine the extent of public knowledge and support of the legal tradition concerning criminal intent and public reaction to an intent defense in a theft charge.
Abstract
Results of a questionnaire administered to 145 Canadian adults indicate that the majority favored finding a defendant guilty if he had committed an offense without intent, but recommended a light sentence or discharge. Most subjects were not even aware of the law regarding criminal intent; and most still favored a guilty verdict even when informed that criminal intent must be proven for a conviction. Thus, results show that most people do not accept the principle that criminal intent must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, preferring to view a lack of intent as a mitigating circumstance. In the second study, 120 adults read a case study in which the defendant used the intent defense with or without supporting evidence or did not use the intent defense. Results of this study show that subjects endorsed a not-guilty verdict when the defendant denied intending to commit a criminal act, but only when he could present supporting evidence. When the defendant could not support his claim (absent-mindedness), subjects behaved as those in the first study: they assigned more guilty verdicts but less harsh sentences. Overall, results suggest that public attitudes are more compatible with the notion of due diligence than that of criminal intent. 16 references.