tags: - colorclass/evolutionary game theory ---see also: - Infant Consciousness - Agency - Morality - Legal Theory - Jurisprudence
“Doli incapax” is a Latin legal term that translates to “incapable of doing harm.” In the context of law, it specifically refers to the presumption that a child is incapable of forming the intent to commit a crime. This presumption can be rebuttable or irrebuttable, depending on the legal system and the age of the child.
Legal Context
1. Age of Criminal Responsibility: - Common Law Systems: In many common law jurisdictions, the age of criminal responsibility is generally set at around 10 years old. Below this age, children are presumed to be doli incapax. - Civil Law Systems: These systems may set different ages for criminal responsibility and handle the concept of doli incapax differently, often with more flexible guidelines.
2. Rebuttable Presumption: - For children aged between 10 and 14, there is often a rebuttable presumption of doli incapax. This means that while the law presumes children within this age range cannot form criminal intent, this presumption can be challenged and overturned by providing evidence to the contrary. - The prosecution must prove that the child understood the wrongful nature of their actions at the time of the offense.
3. Irrebuttable Presumption: - For children below a certain age (e.g., under 10 in many jurisdictions), the presumption of doli incapax is irrebuttable. This means that no matter the circumstances, a child below this age cannot be held criminally responsible.
Application in Legal Proceedings
When considering whether a child is doli incapax, courts may examine several factors, including:
- Maturity and Understanding: Evaluating the child’s intellectual and emotional development. - Nature of the Act: Assessing the complexity and seriousness of the alleged offense. - Child’s Environment: Considering the child’s upbringing and social environment, which may affect their understanding of right and wrong.
Example Cases
Case 1: England and Wales
In England and Wales, the age of criminal responsibility is 10. For children aged 10 to 14, the prosecution must prove the child understood their act was seriously wrong (beyond mere naughtiness).
Case 2: Australia
Australia also adopts a similar approach, with the age of criminal responsibility set at 10. The rebuttable presumption applies to children aged 10 to 14, and the prosecution must provide clear evidence of the child’s criminal intent.
Mathematical Formalization
While doli incapax is a legal doctrine rather than a mathematical concept, the process of rebutting the presumption can involve probabilistic reasoning. For instance, let represent the probability that the child has the requisite guilty knowledge:
where is the evidence presented. The prosecution’s task is to show that given the evidence , the probability that the child had the guilty knowledge exceeds a certain threshold (often beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases).
Related Concepts
- Mens Rea: The mental state of intent required to be guilty of a crime. - Actus Reus: The physical act of committing a crime. - Juvenile Delinquency: Legal term for criminal acts performed by minors.
Understanding doli incapax helps in assessing juvenile justice and ensures that the legal system appropriately considers the developmental stage and understanding of young offenders.