Probabilistic intent in English legal thought.

Criminal intent is considered one of the most controversial legal concepts, and scholars, judges, and legal thinkers have exerted considerable effort to clarify its meaning. They have presented, analyzed, and discussed it extensively, yet this concept remains difficult to define and specify due to its connection to the inner workings of the human psyche and moral responsibility. The English legal system, which is primarily based on judicial precedents, has not escaped the ambiguity surrounding the concept of criminal intent; in fact, the situation is even more complicated. Relying on judicial rulings to elucidate a vague concept such as criminal intent, despite the efforts of judges to bridge the gap between scholarly views and practical application, can result in varying interpretations from one case to another, from one time to another, and sometimes even concerning the same incident. This has led criminal jurisprudence to warn against what it describes as the judicial distortion of the mental element (mens rea). Considering that England leads the countries that follow the common law system (Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-American), to the point that it was even the source of its name, the opinions of its thinkers will be the focus of this discussion. The importance of the study lies in the fact that the mental element, as established in common understanding, is a fundamental component of a crime, without which the crime cannot exist. Criminal responsibility, in general, is linked to the presence of criminal intent in all its forms, and it is therefore necessary to clarify any ambiguities associated with it. One of the main topics addressed in research is the concept of conditional intent, which is the subject of this study.