Crime And Intentional Tort Essay Example for Free

Crime And Intentional Tort Essay A crime is defined as â€Å"acts or omissions that are in violation of law† (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). The states and the federal government have enacted criminal laws that define each of the crimes and prescribe penalties in case of violation or commission (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). The two elements of a criminal offense are: â€Å"actus reus and mens rea; one is physical and the other, mental state† (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). Thus, â€Å"actus reus must be causally related to the mens rea for a crime to occur† meaning that the evil intention of the mind must coincide with the physical manifestation through the unlawful act (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). However, as an exception to this rule, the courts have in a line of judicial precedents ruled that in case of strict liability the person who may not be â€Å"at fault or negligent† shall be legally liable for damages to the injured party. The injured party will only have to prove that he sustained damages (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). Moreover, courts allowed liability on the basis of the actus reus alone as being sufficient (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). For instance, the employer is deemed liable for damages for the negligent acts of his employees while in the performance of their duties. Another example would be in the case of product liability where in the company is held liable for the injury sustained by a customer due to defective products. Crimes may be committed by natural and juridical persons. Natural persons are human beings while juridical persons are entities created by fiction of law deemed to be individuals capable of entering into contracts, owning and or possessing properties, enforcing rights and acquiring debts (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). A corporation therefore is a person. Corporations may be held liable for civil damages for the acts and conduct of the employees it employees. This liability is known as vicarious liability (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). Anent criminal liability, a corporation is not capable of committing a crime because it does not have a mind statelacking in â€Å"mens rea. † It is also a legal fiction and therefore, one cannot put it behind bars. The recent years however, showed a different trend from these arguments. Nowadays, an American corporation engaged in criminal activities such as fraud can be convicted when the criminal conduct of its employee or officer is proven. The federal government through the Deputy Attorney General cited the reasons for indicting corporations as being beneficial to public interests (Thompson, 2003). It â€Å"enables the government to address and be a force for positive change of corporate culture, alter corporate behavior, and prevent, discover, and punish white collar crime† (Thompson, 2003). The federal government not only prosecutes the corporation but also the officers or agents of the corporations who apparently are guilty and culpable. Two recent cases may be cited to illustrate this point. The prosecution of Ebbers where his former finance officer testified against him, resulted in at least a total of 85 years imprisonment consisting of â€Å"one count of conspiracy, one count of securities fraud and seven counts of false regulatory filings† (Associated Press, 2005). It was also discovered that manipulation on the books of accounting resulted in the amount of $ 11 billion (Associated Press, 2005). In another case, Reliant Energy Services, Inc. and four of its officers were criminally charged for â€Å"manipulation of the California energy markets† (U. S. DOJ web site, 2004). Thus, when there is corruption in a company, disrespect for the law, fails to see to it that internal mechanisms are in place to detect fraud and corruption and thereafter fails to cooperate in the investigation, the federal government vows to criminally prosecute the corporation (U. S.  DOJ web site, 2004). In both cases, the corporations involved were charged and prosecuted because of the pervasiveness of the violations such as when directed by upper management or when in conspiracy with the other officers of the corporation (U. S. DOJ web site, 2004). The rule of respondeat superior shall apply in case the violation is an isolated case as when committed by a single officer and with a compliance program being implemented by the corporation. The company can only act through its agents and officers, thus if an overwhelming majority have committed fraud or any criminal act, then such act is considered the act of the corporation—the mens rea being the mental state of the culpable officers and agents. This is penalized in accordance with the Sentencing Guidelines. In the two cases cited, the respective companies are guilty of a felony because the charges were of serious nature with an imprisonment of more than one year (Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, 1998). Corporate crime can be a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the penalty attached by law for its commission.