Little has been written by lawyers about the effect of provocation on culpability for homicide in English law, yet the question of what our moral attitudes should be towards someone who kills or injures another in anger has been a source of lively debate for centuries. The first philosophical inquiry into the moral character of actions in anger, it seeks to resolve the philosophical controversies generated by setting them in the context of an examination of the place of anger in human nature throughout history. A previously unexplored area of research, this work breaks new ground in its use...

In this challenging collection of new essays, leading philosophers and criminal lawyers from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada break with the tradition of treating the philosophical foundations of criminal law as an adjunct to the study of punishment. Focusing clearly on the central issues of moral luck, mistake, and mental illness, this volume aims to reorient the study of criminal law. In the process of retrieving valuable material from traditional law classifications, the contributors break down false associations, reveal hidden truths, and establish new patterns of...

When should someone who may have intentionally or knowingly committed criminal wrongdoing be excused? Excusing Crime examines what excusing conditions are, and why familiar excuses, such as duress, are thought to fulfil those conditions. Setting himself against the 'classical' view of excuses, which has a long heritage, and is enshrined in different forms in many of the world's criminal codes, both liberal and non-liberal; Jeremy Horder argues that it is now time to move forwards. He contends that a wider range of excuses--'diminished capacity', 'due diligence' and 'demands of...

The fourth collection of essays in this long-established series brings together some of the leading contributors to the study of the philosophical foundations of common law. Key issues in contract, tort, and criminal law are subjected to philosophical scrutiny, the aim being to provide an exciting new basis for advanced teaching and further research.

When should someone who may have intentionally or knowingly committed criminal wrongdoing be excused? Excusing Crime examines what excusing conditions are, and why familiar excuses, such as duress, are thought to fulfill those conditions.
The 'classical' view of excuses sees them as rational defects (such as mistake) in the motive force behind an action, but contrasts them with 'denials of responsibility', such as insanity, where the rational defect in that motive force is attributable to a mental defect in the agent him- or herself. The classical view has a long heritage, and is...

Democracy cannot function if the public loses faith in politicians, and that faith will be lost if politicians abuse their power with impunity. This book analyses the criminal offence of misconduct in office, and explains how it should be used, along with other measures, to hold politicians to account for abuse of their position.