Practice question
An operator voluntarily accepts a machine task but, through proved lack of skill and omitted required safeguards, unintentionally causes punishable injury. The prosecution says accepting the task necessarily proves dolo; the defense says lack of harmful intent excludes culpa. Which is correct?
- Both shortcuts are wrong: the proved fault may support culpa without deliberate harmful intent
- Both positions are necessarily correct
- Voluntary task acceptance conclusively proves intentional attack
- No lack-of-skill event can ever be criminally negligent
- Culpa requires an intention to cause the very injury
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Articles3 and5, as applicable: https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.