crime
Let an agent keep the alleged act, the case and the conviction apart, and never treat a suspicion, a charge or a record as the same thing.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
written by Claude from model knowledge without web access - no source was read, every claim is a lead to verify
Researched by: Claude
Purpose and description
Let an agent keep the alleged act, the case and the conviction apart, and never treat a suspicion, a charge or a record as the same thing.
An act or omission that a jurisdiction has defined as punishable by the state, established as such only by a legal process and not by the act alone.
What it is for: Not for anything. It is a category the state applies to conduct, and the model exists so that an agent handles allegations without assuming guilt.
It can be record an allegation, which is not a finding; investigate, charge and try it, which are separate stages with separate standards; convict or acquit, which is what settles it and only for that charge; spend or expunge a record, after which it may not be used; get it wrong, which is why every stage has its own evidential bar.
Distinguishing features
Defined by a jurisdiction, so the same act is a crime in one place and not in another, and changes over time
Established by process: an act becomes a crime in law only when a court says so
The act, the allegation, the charge, the case and the conviction are five different things
A civil wrong may look identical and be handled entirely differently
What it looks like
Nothing to see. What is observed is conduct, and whether that conduct is a crime is a conclusion of law reached later, by someone else.
How it is recognised
There is no visual identification of a crime, and treating an observation as one is the central error this model exists to prevent
What can be observed is an act, an injury, a scene or a person - each of which is a different thing to record
Recording an observation as a crime prejudges exactly what the process is meant to decide
Related models
is confused with - the act is observable; the crime is a legal conclusion about it
is confused with - the same conduct may be both, or only one, with different standards and consequences
produces - the record is a separate object with its own lifetime and access rules
is defined by - there is no crime outside a definition
involves - suspects, victims and witnesses are roles with different protections
In practice
Families and kinds
by seriousness: summary, indictable, and the local equivalents
by subject: against the person, against property, against the state, regulatory
by stage: reported, under investigation, charged, tried, convicted, appealed
by record status: current, spent, expunged, sealed
Identifiers
offence code jurisdiction-specific names the offence category, not an event
case or crime reference agency-specific identifies the proceeding, which is what actually moves through stages
Standards and regulation
The criminal law of the jurisdiction, which is the only thing that makes conduct an offence
Rules of evidence and procedure, which decide what may be relied on at each stage
Rehabilitation and expungement rules, which decide when a record may no longer be used
Data protection rules for criminal offence data, which are stricter than for ordinary personal data
Failure modes and hazards
Treating an allegation as a finding, which is the central harm this model guards against
Carrying spent or expunged records forward, which is unlawful and hard to undo
Applying one jurisdiction definition in another
Conflating suspect, defendant and offender, which are three different statuses with different rights
Also called
+1053
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Also registered as vr.tr.crime-act
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 4 bundles · 8 layers · 8 findings · 16 questions.
Definition and jurisdiction What makes this conduct an offence, and where.
There is no such thing as a crime in general: without a jurisdiction and a definition there is only conduct.
Offence definition
The elements that must be proved.
Elements of the offence
What must be established for conduct to fall under it.
- Which elements define this offence, under which statute and jurisdiction? definition
- What conduct falls outside it that a lay reader would assume falls inside? boundary
Jurisdictional variation
How the definition differs elsewhere.
Variation across jurisdictions
Where the same conduct is treated differently.
- How does this offence differ between the jurisdictions in scope? boundary
- What must an agent verify before applying a definition across a border? action
Stage and status Where a matter has got to, and what may be said about it.
Every stage has its own evidential standard and its own permitted language, and collapsing them is how an agent defames someone.
Stages of the process
Report, investigation, charge, trial, outcome.
Current stage
Which stage a matter has reached and what that permits.
- What stage has this matter reached, and on whose record? provenance
- What may and may not be asserted publicly at this stage? action
Status of the people involved
Suspect, defendant, offender, victim, witness.
Roles and their protections
Which role each person holds and what protection follows.
- What status does each person hold in this matter? definition
- Which protections attach to that status, and what must an agent not do? action
Evidence and proof What is relied on and to what standard.
The whole difference between an allegation and a finding is the evidence and the standard applied to it.
Evidence held
What exists, where it came from, and its integrity.
Evidence and its chain
The material relied on and how it was obtained.
- What evidence exists in this matter, obtained how, and is its chain intact? provenance
- What evidence is inadmissible, and why? boundary
Standard of proof
What must be shown at this stage.
Applicable standard
The bar for the current stage and who must meet it.
- What standard of proof applies at this stage, and who bears the burden? definition
- What must an agent refuse to conclude on the evidence available? action
Record and consequence What is kept afterwards and what it may be used for.
The record outlives the case and does more damage than the case did, so its rules matter more to an agent than the offence does.
The record
What is recorded, by whom, for how long.
Record and retention
The record created and how long it may be held.
- What record does this outcome create, held by whom and for how long? provenance
- When does it become spent or expungeable, and what changes then? boundary
Permitted use
Who may see it and for what decisions.
Permitted uses of the record
What the record may lawfully influence.
- For which decisions may this record lawfully be used, and by whom? action
- What must an agent refuse to disclose or take into account? action
What the second pass must settle
- Should the registry model the offence category, the alleged event and the case as three linked things?
- How should an agent represent an allegation so that its status can never be silently upgraded?
- What retention and access rules should the model carry so downstream systems inherit them rather than inventing their own?