Review of Findlay Stark, Culpable Carelessness: Recklessness and Negligence in the Criminal Law: Cambridge University Press, 2016, 327 pp [Book Review]

Criminal Law and Philosophy 12 (4):725-730 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This book review sketches the main arguments of Findlay Stark’s book, and then goes on to develop an objection to Stark’s account of one of the core notions in the book—namely, awareness of risk.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,323

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Limits of Criminal Culpability.Mark Thornton - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 25 (1):159-175.
A Theory of Criminal Negligence.Victor Vridar Ramraj - 1998 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)
The distinction between negligence and recklessness is unstable.Kenneth Simons - 2009 - In Paul Robinson, Kimberly Ferzan & Stephen Garvey (eds.), Criminal Law Conversations. pp. 290--291.
Non-Tracing Cases of Culpable Ignorance.Holly M. Smith - 2011 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (2):115-146.
Negligence and Ignorance.A. D. Woozley - 1978 - Philosophy 53 (205):293-306.
Willfully Blind for Good Reason.Deborah Hellman - 2009 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 3 (3):301-316.


Added to PP

51 (#314,230)

6 months
10 (#277,276)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alexander Sarch
University of Surrey

Citations of this work

Author’s Reply: Negligence and Normative Import.Katrina L. Sifferd & Tyler K. Fagan - 2022 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 16 (2):353-371.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Factive and nonfactive mental state attribution.Jennifer Nagel - 2017 - Mind and Language 32 (5):525-544.

Add more references