The Eternal Dilemma Between Possible Intent and Conscious Fault: A Recent Case-Study in Italian Jurisprudence

Abstract

The essay tends to identify the conceptual, substantive and procedural boundary that distinguishes possible intent and conscious guilt, since the difficult definition of intent in criminal doctrine, is referred to the psychological discipline, which has so far provided uncertain information and assessments. The research will be structured through the response to the following arguments. The question will be about the probability of the event or the reasonable doubt about the event represented by the agent. Which of the two criteria is preferable? What is the difference between probability and doubt of the event? What does it mean to 'accept the event'? In the expressions 'accept the risk' and 'accept the event' the term acceptance has different meanings. It is useless to distinguish acceptance of the risk and acceptance of the event if the same evidence is then sufficient to prove both the former and the latter. Willfulness can only occur when there is acceptance of the risk of an event? How can the risk be translated in terms of reasonable doubts? On these questions we will try to clarify and achieve the objectives set out above.