A Ladder, Not a List
The structure of an offence works like a Ladder, Not a list. Each question builds strictly on the previous one:
- Is there human conduct at all?
- Does it match a statutory description, is it typical?
- Is it unlawful, or is it covered by a justification?
- Can it be imputed personally to this person, is there culpability?
- Is it punishable, or does a bar to punishment apply?
Human conduct, and its absence
Only voluntary behaviour counts as conduct. The following three cases lack human agency entirely:
| Case | Why it is not conduct |
|---|---|
| Irresistible force | An external force moves the body as an object. |
| Reflex movements | The movement completely bypasses the will. |
| States of unconsciousness | Consciousness is totally absent, as in deep sleep. |
Under actio libera in causa, liability shifts back if the actor freely caused their own incapacity.
For legal entities, Spanish law introduced corporate liability in 2010 for a closed list of crimes.
The argument about the floors
The order of stages is fixed, but their contents have evolved over time:
- The classical model placed objective elements in the type and all mental states in culpability.
- Finalism moved intent into the type, treating culpability as a normative judgment.
- Functionalist theories shape each category directly around criminal policy goals.
Common pitfall: calling someone under physical compulsion justified or innocent. The correct answer is that their action fails stage one entirely.