Causation in the Criminal Law

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

This chapter notes that the law has a bafflingly large number of legal tests for causation. There is no universally accepted theory in the general part of the law of crimes. There are thousands of separate usages of "cause" in the thousands of liability rules of criminal law; and there are nine variations of cause-in-fact tests, seven varieties of proximate cause tests, and three proposals supposing that a unified test should supplant any of the sixty-three possible combinations of the bifurcated tests. Despite disagreement about the proper test of causation to be given to juries, such juries often seem unperplexed at making findings of causation in particular cases. This may be because causation may be known better by common intuition in particular instances than by the abstract tests legal theorists have devised to "guide" such intuitions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationThe Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law
PublisherOxford University Press
ISBN (Electronic)9780199897506
ISBN (Print)9780195314854
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2 2011

Fingerprint

Criminal Law
Causation
Causes
Intuition
Juries
Sixties
Crime
Theorists
Liability

Keywords

  • Bifurcated tests
  • Causation
  • Cause in fact
  • Criminal law
  • Legal test
  • Liability rules
  • Proximate cause

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)

Cite this

Moore, M. (2011). Causation in the Criminal Law. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007

Causation in the Criminal Law. / Moore, Michael.

The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press, 2011.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Moore, M 2011, Causation in the Criminal Law. in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007
Moore M. Causation in the Criminal Law. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press. 2011 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007
Moore, Michael. / Causation in the Criminal Law. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press, 2011.
@inbook{8a6bf157218c482fb396e66d1eb086ad,
title = "Causation in the Criminal Law",
abstract = "This chapter notes that the law has a bafflingly large number of legal tests for causation. There is no universally accepted theory in the general part of the law of crimes. There are thousands of separate usages of {"}cause{"} in the thousands of liability rules of criminal law; and there are nine variations of cause-in-fact tests, seven varieties of proximate cause tests, and three proposals supposing that a unified test should supplant any of the sixty-three possible combinations of the bifurcated tests. Despite disagreement about the proper test of causation to be given to juries, such juries often seem unperplexed at making findings of causation in particular cases. This may be because causation may be known better by common intuition in particular instances than by the abstract tests legal theorists have devised to {"}guide{"} such intuitions.",
keywords = "Bifurcated tests, Causation, Cause in fact, Criminal law, Legal test, Liability rules, Proximate cause",
author = "Michael Moore",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780195314854",
booktitle = "The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
address = "United States",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Causation in the Criminal Law

AU - Moore, Michael

PY - 2011/9/2

Y1 - 2011/9/2

N2 - This chapter notes that the law has a bafflingly large number of legal tests for causation. There is no universally accepted theory in the general part of the law of crimes. There are thousands of separate usages of "cause" in the thousands of liability rules of criminal law; and there are nine variations of cause-in-fact tests, seven varieties of proximate cause tests, and three proposals supposing that a unified test should supplant any of the sixty-three possible combinations of the bifurcated tests. Despite disagreement about the proper test of causation to be given to juries, such juries often seem unperplexed at making findings of causation in particular cases. This may be because causation may be known better by common intuition in particular instances than by the abstract tests legal theorists have devised to "guide" such intuitions.

AB - This chapter notes that the law has a bafflingly large number of legal tests for causation. There is no universally accepted theory in the general part of the law of crimes. There are thousands of separate usages of "cause" in the thousands of liability rules of criminal law; and there are nine variations of cause-in-fact tests, seven varieties of proximate cause tests, and three proposals supposing that a unified test should supplant any of the sixty-three possible combinations of the bifurcated tests. Despite disagreement about the proper test of causation to be given to juries, such juries often seem unperplexed at making findings of causation in particular cases. This may be because causation may be known better by common intuition in particular instances than by the abstract tests legal theorists have devised to "guide" such intuitions.

KW - Bifurcated tests

KW - Causation

KW - Cause in fact

KW - Criminal law

KW - Legal test

KW - Liability rules

KW - Proximate cause

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923506192&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84923506192&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007

DO - 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195314854.003.0007

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84923506192

SN - 9780195314854

BT - The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Criminal Law

PB - Oxford University Press

ER -