Revealing criminal motives
Legal cognition between science, rhetoric and criminology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2312Keywords:
criminal motives, criminal responsibility, intention, criminal science, forensic rhetoric, criminologyAbstract
If crime is the most reprehensible betrayal of social bonds and expectations, and therefore deserves the most severe legal sanction (punishment), the assessment of criminal responsibility must be exceptionally accurate. At trial, jurists must evaluate not only the rational dimension of conduct, as expressed through the defendant’s (presumed) intention; they are also required to address and, as far as possible, to reveal the defendant’s underlying motives, no matter how “irrational” these may appear, since they arise from emotions, feelings, passions, and moods. In doing so, jurists should be awarethat such motives are grasped through the interplay between the conceptualisations provided by criminal law, as elaborated and systematised by legal doctrine in the form of criminal science, and the set of arguments discovered, developed and discussed by forensic rhetoric on the basis of common sense, as filtered and organised through a criminological approach grounded in criminal types. Yet, as far as concerns us here, these “irrational” motives – complementary to the rational intention first addressed at trial –make particularly clear how the application of criminal law in the end relies on otherwise implicit forms of social knowledge, precisely as conveyed by criminal science, forensic rhetoric, and criminology.
Downloads
Metrics
Global Statistics ℹ️
|
4
Views
|
0
Downloads
|
|
4
Total
|
|
References
Allan, J., et al., eds., 2020. Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction [online]. London/New York: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429453342 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429453342
Anscombe, G. E. M., 1963. Intention. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Ashworth, A., and Zedner, L., 2014. Preventive justice [online]. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198712527.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198712527.001.0001
Atienza, M., 2005. Las razones del derecho. Teorías de la argumentación jurídica. Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Bertea, S., 2003. Legal Argumentation Theory and the Concept of Law. In: F. H. van Eemeren et al., eds., Anyone Who Has a View. Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation [online]. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 213-226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1078-8_17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1078-8_17
Bertea, S., 2013. A Theory of Legal Obligation. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Bombelli, G., 2023. Normativity, Truth, Validity and Effectiveness. Remarks starting from the Horizon of the “Common Sense”. Phenomenology and Mind [online], 24, 126-136. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17454/pam-2417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17454/pam-2417
Brooks, P., 2001. Troubling Confessions. Speaking Guilt in Law and Literature. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
Calvi, A. A., 1967. Tipo normativo e tipo criminologico d’autore. Padua: CEDAM.
Candeub, A., 1994. Motive Crimes and Other Minds. University of Pennsylvania Law Review [online], 142(6), 2071-2123. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/3312511 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3312511
Carlizzi, G., and Tuzet, G., 2018. La prova scientifica nel processo penale. Turin: Giappichelli.
Cavalla, F., et al., 2007. Retorica Processo Verità. Milan: FrancoAngeli.
Cervantes, M. de, 2008. El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Chiu, E. M., 2005. The Challenge of Motive in the Criminal Law. Buffalo Criminal Law Review [online], 8(2), 653-729. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2005.8.2.653 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2005.8.2.653
Cochran, P., 2017. Common Sense and Legal Judgment: Community Knowledge, Political Power, and Rhetorical Practice [online]. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780773552319 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780773552319
Cominelli, L., 2018. Cognition of the Law. Toward a Cognitive Sociology of Law and Behavior [online]. Cham: Springer. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89348-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89348-8_4
De Caro, M., 2018. Free Will and Free Rides. In: F. Bacchini, S. Dell’Antonio and S. Maffettone, eds., Free Will: Historical and Analytic Perspectives. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 15-26.
De Regt, H. W., 2017. Understanding scientific understanding [online]. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89348-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190652913.001.0001
Delitala, G., 1964. Diritto penale. Enciclopedia del diritto, XII. Milan: Giuffrè, 1095-1100.
Di Donato, F., 2020. The Analysis of Legal Cases. A Narrative Approach [online]. New York/London: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315223087 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315223087
Di Giovine, O., 2013. La sanzione penale nella prospettiva delle neuroscienze. Rivista italiana di diritto e procedura penale, 56(2), 626-642.
Duff, R. A., et al., eds., 2015. Criminalization. The Political Morality of the Criminal Law [online]. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198726357.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198726357.001.0001
Eastman, N., and Campbell, C. 2006. Neuroscience and legal determination of criminal responsibility. Nature Reviews Neuroscience [online], 7(4), 311-318. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1887
Ferri, E., 1926. Studi sulla criminalità. Turin: UTET.
Fletcher, G. P., 2000. Rethinking Criminal Law [online]. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195136951.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195136951.001.0001
Flor, R., 2021. La rilevanza causale delle interazioni psichiche nel diritto penale. La causalità psichica nelle fattispecie monosoggettive. Naples: ESI.
Frost, M., 2005. Introduction to Classical Legal Rhetoric. A lost Heritage. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Garapon, A., 2001. Bien juger. Essai sur le ritual judiciaire. Paris: Odile Jacob.
Gatti, T., 1931. I moventi del reato nella storia delle legislazioni. Diritto antico. Turin: Bocca.
Gimbernat Ordeig, E., 2020. Concepto y método de la ciencia del derecho penal. Montevideo/Buenos Aires: Julio César Faira.
Hart, H. L. A., 2008. Punishment and Responsibility. Essays in the Philosophy of Law. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Hassemer, W., 2012. Perché punire è necessario: Una difesa del diritto penale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Hassemer, W., 2014. Fattispecie e tipo. Indagini sulla teoria del diritto penale. Naples: ESI.
Hesnard, A. L. M., 1963. Psychologie du crime. Paris: Payot.
Hessick, C. B., 2006. Motive’s Role in Criminal Punishment. Southern California Law Review, 80(1), 89-150.
Husak, D., 2008. Overcriminalization. The limits of Criminal Law [online]. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328714.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328714.001.0001
Husak, D., 2010. The Philosophy of Criminal Law. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Jasanoff, S., 1995. Science at the bar: law, science and technology in America [online]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674039124 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674039124
Jiménez de Asúa, L., 1982. Psicoanálisis criminal. 6th ed. Buenos Aires: Depalma.
Liefgreen, A., et al., 2021. Motive on the mind: Explanatory preferences at multiple stages of the legal-investigative process. Cognition [online], 217, 104892. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104892 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104892
Lumer, C., 2019. Unconscious Motives and Actions — Agency, Freedom and Responsibility. Frontiers in Psychology [online], 9, art.2777, 1-16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02777 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02777
Malinverni, A., 1955. Scopo e movente nel diritto penale. Turin: UTET.
Manzin, M., Puppo, F., and Tomasi, S., eds., 2015. Studies on argumentation and legal philosophy. Further steps towards a pluralistic approach. Naples: ESI.
Passerini Glazel, L., 2016. Institutional ontology as an ontology of types. Phenomenology and Mind [online], 3, 78-91. Available at: https://doi.org/10.13128/Phe_Mi-19610
Paul, S., 2020. The Philosophy of Action. An Introduction [online]. New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315629773 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315629773
Perelman, C., 1980. [Previously unreleased anthology]. Justice, Law, and Argument. Dordrecht/Boston/London: D. Reidel. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9010-4
Radbruch, G., 1950. Legal Philosophy. In: Harvard University Press, ed., The Legal Philosophies of Lask, Radbruch, and Dabin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 47-224.
Raine, A., 2013. The anatomy of violence: The biological roots of crime [online]. New York: Pantheon. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/e569292014-001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/e569292014-001
Salvi, N., 2024. La condición multiparadigmática del derecho. Tucumán: Bibliotex.
Simmel, G., 2010. The View of Life. Four metaphysical essays with journal aphorisms. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226757858.001.0001
Smith, A. T. H., 1978. On Actus Reus and Mens Rea. In: P.R. Glazebrook, ed., Reshaping the Criminal Law: Essays in Honour of Glanville Williams. London: Stevens & Sons, 95-107.
Stein, P. G., 1991-1992. Roman Law, Common Law, and Civil Law. Tulane Law Review, 66(6), 1591-1604.
Velo Dalbrenta, D., 2013a. In Search of the Lombrosian Type of Delinquent. In: P. Knepper and P.J. Ystehede, eds., The Cesare Lombroso Handbook. London/New York: Routledge, 214-225.
Velo Dalbrenta, D., 2013b. Per inconfessabili motivi. Aspetti dell’interiorità nell’esperienza penale. In: D. Velo Dalbrenta, Del diritto penale come esperienza. Tre studi inattuali. Padua: CLEUP, 47-99.
Veneziani, P., 2000. Motivi e colpevolezza. Turin: Giappichelli.
Wittgenstein, L., 1986. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Daniele Velo Dalbrenta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence and it regulates how others can use your work. Further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
