Learn something new every day
More Info... by email
Reckless disregard is a somewhat redundant legal term that is used in many courts to discuss the intent of a person who is charged with a crime. Intent or mens rea generally has to be established in order for a criminal case to be successfully prosecuted, and one of the ways to establish this is to propose that a person was reckless. They can also have done something purposefully, negligently or knowingly. Each description means slightly different things — when someone acts with reckless disregard, they commit an act they know is probably illegal and that could harm people, but they don’t have an actual intent to harm a person or people.
The idea of reckless disregard can be a bit confusing. If a person behaves recklessly, disregarding the law, there’s a clear inference that he might harm others. The drunk driver who climbs into a car could be accused of behaving recklessly, for example.
The driver doesn’t want to hurt anyone, but the very fact that he is drunk makes that scenario much more likely. It’s sometimes argued that the drunk person is acting in a knowing or purposeful way because most reasonable people are aware that the incidence of car accidents increases when people are driving in an intoxicated state. Still, the basic intent is to drive the car, though this breaks many laws, and not to kill someone with the car. Therefore it may pass the test of being considered reckless disregard.
Yet this does not mean that the drunk driver is any less culpable. That someone is behaving recklessly can’t be used as a defense against a crime. A small reckless act might have some weight when a person receives a sentence, but most reckless acts, especially reckless disregard for human life, are treated abhorrently by the court. No court wants to hear the tragic case that involves death or suffering of others when such acts could have been prevented.
Reckless disregard may establish that a person did not have specific intent to harm, and this might suggest different charges. Murdering several people on purpose and murdering them recklessly could look very different. Homicide charges might become manslaughter charges, instead, for instance. This depends much on jurisdiction and regional law, and is based on the severity of crimes.
Usually, the person acting with reckless disregard knows that he or she is breaking the law and may possibly be endangering others. This test of “knowing” is usually based on what the courts think a reasonable person could have concluded in the situation about their actions. Being reckless is the opposite of being reasonable and the tendency toward reckless behavior that is criminal is ultimately an affront to society and worthy of prosecution.
@Logicfest -- don't forget that analysis is also used in civil law. Take the concept of negligence. Someone might be liable for harming another without meaning to do so if it is found that person was negligent. Mental state doesn't matter in that analysis, but conduct and results do.
It is a fascinating legal concept because of the way it alters judging mental state. It used to be that one had to show clear intent to harm someone. The reckless disregard concept removes that requirement because someone can be found to have violated the law by harming someone even if they didn't mean to do that.
In other words, intent is removed from the analysis. In any state, a lot of the criminal code wouldn't work if reckless disregard was not used to establish mental state.
One of our editors will review your suggestion and make changes if warranted. Note that depending on the number of suggestions we receive, this can take anywhere from a few hours to a few days. Thank you for helping to improve wiseGEEK!