A man is stabbed, survives the wound, and dies that night when the hospital burns down. The stabbing was a condition without which he would not have died. Why is the death nonetheless not attributed to the assailant?

B. The risk that materialised in the death was not the risk his conduct created

Because causation and imputation are two questions and only the first is satisfied. The stabbing created a risk of death from blood loss; the man died of a risk of fire, which the assailant did not create. The option regarding the broken chain of causation gets the right conclusion for the wrong reason: factual causation is intact, and it is the normative attribution that fails.