C.14 - Fire case

I. From the facts described, it should be noted that Antonio, in a state of panic and fearing that his mother would perish from the flames, tried to bring forward her death (he tried to spare his mother further suffering), for which purpose he beat her severely. Later, the police and neighbours managed to enter the house and extinguish the flames. The elderly woman was seriously injured.

II. We are asked to analyse the responsibility of Antonio, the only one whose criminal responsibility we can now ask ourselves, and we will do so in parts:

II.1. First of all, we shall analyse whether Antonio carries out conduct in the criminal-legal sense; in other words, we shall analyse whether the subject carries out a human process, external and susceptible to self-control. We can affirm that it is a human process, since it is not a mere biological process in which the subject is immersed as a mere animal (actus hominis), but rather that reasoning comes into play and therefore the possibility of self-control (actus humanus). On the other hand, as to whether it is an external process and not a thought, here too the answer is positive, since these are acts of hitting, throwing furniture on someone, etc. Finally, we will also affirm the existence of that minimum of freedom or volition, which allows us to determine that the conduct is susceptible to self-control given that it has alternatives when it comes to acting.

The facts refer to Antonio being in a state of panic. This status raises doubts about its relevance for the purpose of excluding human action. We advance, however, the consequence that once the existence of self-control is affirmed, there is little doubt about the absence of action. Indeed, we rule out the possibility that it is a case of reflex movements, since nothing in the facts allows us to identify an impulse operating on a motor centre without the consciousness being able to avoid it; we speak rather of the choice between various means of striking a blow, pushing a piece of furniture... Self-control is present. But there is no doubt that in a certain way it suffers from a diminished capacity for self-control, something which can be identified as a primitive reaction, which does not exclude the existence of human action.

As for the presence of an irresistible force, it should be said that there is no perceived physical influence of an external factor that prevents any reaction. In this case, we perceive how Antonio is "forced" to kill his mother in order to spare her suffering. But he does not see himself as violent: nothing moves his arms in that direction, but as a rational subject he weighs up between two evils (to burn to death or to die according to what he supposes to be less suffering). This shows that this kind of force (the fire that threatens to burn them both to death) is not irresistible. It would rather be a reaction to the lurking fire; but for that very reason it would be resistible: it is possible to act against it in any other way. Finally, it is not easy to question the existence of human behaviour under the influence of unconsciousness. This could happen if Antonio were to suffer an epileptic seizure, about which, however, nothing is said in the facts.

At final, therefore, Antony engages in conduct.

II.2. Secondly, we will analyse whether this human conduct constitutes the subject of a crime. To do so, it is necessary to study the criteria of objective imputation and their application to the case.

The first step requires applying the heuristic formula of condicio sine qua non, by virtue of which, by mentally suppressing the conduct of hitting the ground and throwing furniture on it, the result of injuries and coma would not occur. As a first step, it is necessary (except in crimes of omission) but not sufficient, so we will go on to analyse the creation of the typically relevant risk; in this case we will include the blow and the crushing within the subject of homicide in 138, which would also include the injuries in 147 for the blow and in 148 for throwing a wardrobe and a bed, which are means to cause at least injuries, but even the death of the person who is hit in this circumstance.

The second step is to establish the realisation of the risk in the result, i.e., at first a series of serious injuries are caused which are carried out in the result and subsequently, the homicide is not consummated, as the victim remains in a coma and there is no data on his death. Therefore, up to this point of the analysis, we could affirm that his conduct carries out the subject of attempted Degree homicide (according to our understanding, this attempted homicide at Degree could absorb the disvalue of the injuries consummated).

II.3. Thirdly, it is necessary to analyse the subjective imputation of the crime of homicide (which will include the crime of injury). To do so, we must infer the existence of malice aforethought. In other words, whether Antonio mentally represented the risk involved in his conduct at the time of carrying it out, guided by the criteria of reference letter (that the intent is intent to kill, the objective part, and not something else) and simultaneity (that the knowledge of the risk must coincide at least one moment with the risk goal). In this specific case, there is practically no doubt that Antonio represented the risk of his conduct, as in the face of an evil such as flames, he considered how to produce death more quickly, so he must have undoubtedly represented the creation of such a risk. His conduct is wilful misconduct.

II.4. Fourthly, there is no cause of justification that makes the unlawfulness of the conduct disappear: it is not a case of legitimate self-defence because there is no prior aggression, and neither is it a case of state of necessity, as the status crisis for legal assets is not intended to be avoided by a safeguarding action, but rather a homicidal action is provoked, which is precisely the realisation of the evil that the fire threatened to provoke. Moreover, life is not in any case to be weighed up to the point of justifying the death of an innocent person. In final, his typical conduct is also unlawful.

II.5. Fifthly, for culpability to exist, the subject must have full freedom, that is to say, he must have willfulness, as well as volition. Antonio knows that he is hitting (malice, as has already been said), but perhaps he does not know what he is doing, that he is adopting means which, in addition to killing his mother, are also going to cause her suffering, that it is a deplorable, bad, unjust conduct. His reaction does not seem to be logical, but contradictory. This suggests that he suffers from some psychic anomaly or disorder. It is even possible that Antonio is a subject who is not capable of knowing the rules or of being guided by them (unaccountable). To determine whether this is the case status, let us look at the facts: Antonio and his mother find themselves in a very serious status , a fire, perceived without error by him; moreover, there is no escape, as the doors and windows are blocked by bars that cannot be removed from the inside. Faced with this status and the momentary lack of financial aid Antonio tries to kill his mother because of the panic of being burnt to death. According to these facts, Antonio could be in a transient mental disorder status understood as a momentary impossibility of motivation due to exogenous causes. In this case, the cause is the fire as an imminent threat of a cruel death and the status of disorder is momentary, until the financial aid arrives and he leaves the house in a state, not of panic, but of nervous excitement.
Therefore, we could conclude by affirming the absence of guilt due to a transitory mental disorder, given that the seriousness of the status suggests that this panic is a sufficiently serious pathology to deprive the subject of that voluntariness which is necessary for guilt. However, it cannot be ruled out that the defence should be considered incomplete.

III. In conclusion, although Antonio's conduct constitutes attempted murder, he would not be guilty as he is in a status of transient mental disorder.