In the context of Criminal law, there are two major categories of crime; specific and General intent crimes. Intent crimes are the connection between the physical act of committing the crime and the defendant’s state of mind when committing the crime during prosecution. In a specific intent crime, the prosecutor has to prove that the defendant had the intention of committing a crime and the intention to achieve a specific goal (Lesser, & Williams-Maynard, 2022). There are various examples of specific intent crimes that should be classified as a general intent crime. These examples include assaults, burglary, conspiracy, embezzlement, first-degree premeditated murder, forgery, and larceny.
Assault crime is committed when someone physically attacks another person through violence or harassment. For example, when Dennis assaults Sammy’s child over a bicycle, Sammy decides to go to Dennis’s apartment and punch him in the face with the intention of revenge, and in the process, Dennis develops a black spot on his face. This kind of crime should not be classified as a specific intent crime but rather a general intent crime. Sammy did not intend to give Dennis a black spot on the eye. From the understanding of the law, Embezzlement is classified as a specific crime, although it should appear under general intent. One may be distributing funds not meant for distribution to benefit themselves; it might also be in the company’s interest, more so when it relates to the company’s development. Larceny is another example of a specific intent crime that should be classified as a general intent crime (Lesser, & Williams-Maynard, 2022). This kind of crime occurs when someone takes another’s a property without permission and has no intentions of returning it.
Specific intent crimes and General intent crimes are two confusing and hard-to-differentiate crimes under the docket of criminal law. Some individuals perform some actions to achieve a specific result, but in the end, they appear to get a result different from their expected goal. Under this case, the specific intent crime is now converted to general intent crime. I agree with the post that, in general intent crime, the actor is responsible for the outcome of their actions since they carry out criminal activity willingly (Lesser, & Williams-Maynard, 2022). Taking the example of Bigamy is a common criminal offense that most people commit daily worldwide. People leave their marriage and get engaged in another marriage when they have not divorced from the initial marriage. This act is not far from adultery and is punishable, as highlighted in the marriage act and Florida statute. An agreement should be made upon which marriage should be nullified in case of Bigamy rather than going through a court trial.
In support of your post, kidnapping should not be categorized as a specific intent crime but rather a general intent crime. Some kidnappers do not have ill intentions while holding some individual captives, but this does not mean it is a fair act. Any form of kidnapping should be regarded as a criminal offense and prosecuted by law. The moment someone has been taken and held captive against their will, whether the kidnappers did not have an intention to harm the captives, they should be arrested and prosecuted. As was previously said, proving the components of a particular purpose crime is typically significantly more challenging for prosecution than proving the elements of a broad intent offense. Again, to prove that a defendant had the desire to conduct the crime and the purpose to carry it out, the prosecutor must establish specific intent.
Lesser, J. A., & Williams-Maynard, S. (2022). A Categorical Review of Abuses: From Civil Bad Faith to Criminal Bankruptcy Fraud. American Bankruptcy Institute Journal, 41(3), 18-48. Web.