✨Teoría del Delito [RESUMEN CON EJEMPLOS]: Todo sobre esta en 5 pasos.

Main ideas / lesson

The video explains the legal theory of crime as a checklist: a crime exists only if all required elements are present. If any element is missing, there is no crime. If any element limits responsibility, the case may be treated as less serious or not punishable.

The overall claim is that legal theory helps prevent unjust sentences—for example, the same “killing” act may not always be treated as homicide in every case, depending on circumstances.

---

Methodology / structure (the “5 steps”)

The course is framed as progressing through the elements needed to establish criminal liability. The main elements are:

1) The crime must have a typical action (Tipicidad)

Meaning of typicity

A conduct is “typical” if it matches the behavior defined by law as a crime—the facts align with a specific penal norm.

Key requirements in the action part

• Subjects (who):

  • Active subject: the person who commits the offense (must be a natural person).
  • Passive subject: the person who suffers the harm.
  • If no perpetrator can be identified in a “mysterious death” scenario, the theory says there is effectively no crime established.

• Action/omission (what):

  • Action must be:
    • Human
    • External
    • Voluntary
  • If the killing occurs involuntarily, there is no “action” for legal purposes.

Involuntary action exceptions (examples given)

1. Irresistible force: the actor is forced so they cannot avoid the act. Example: Louis is slammed into a windshield; a killing results.

2. Reflex movement: automatic movement in response to a stimulus. Example: steering to avoid a condom leads to a fatal accident.

3. Unconsciousness states: e.g., sleepwalking. Example: Juan kills while sleepwalking; it’s treated as involuntary.

Omission can also count as an “action”

• Omission = failing to do something when there is a legal duty/obligation to act.
• Example: a lifeguard who must supervise children and does nothing—if a child dies, the lifeguard may be treated as responsible for homicide by omission.

Objective imputation (connecting conduct → legally relevant result)

Even if the person performs a harmful act, conviction requires that the result be attributable in the legal sense.

• The person’s behavior must create an impermissible risk
• and the outcome must occur as a consequence of that risk

Example:

• Juan stabs Louis; Louis then dies from a heart attack caused by a pre-existing illness.
• Because the death is not caused by the risk Juan created, homicide conviction would fail due to lack of proper objective imputation/typicity.

---

2) The action must be unlawful (Antijuridicidad)

Meaning

The typical conduct contains a disvalue: it violates the law and harms/protects a protected legal good (e.g., life).

Illegality is excluded by “causes of justification” (causas de justificación)

A conduct that would otherwise be a crime is not unlawful when justified by a legal situation of conflict.

Example justification scenario:

• Juan kills Louis during a conflicting situation.
• Louis allegedly tries to end Juan’s life (throws him off a cliff), but during the struggle Juan ends up throwing Louis off.
• The system treats Juan’s act as justified due to the need to protect/save life.

Three main causes of justification explicitly listed

• Self-defense (legítima defensa)
• State of necessity (estado de necesidad)
  • Example: breaking a car window to save a child from dying.
• Fulfillment of a duty (cumplimiento de un deber)
  • Example: a police officer kills a shooting terrorist while performing duty.

---

3) The action must be culpable (Culpabilidad)

Meaning

Beyond being typical and unlawful, the act must be attributable to the perpetrator through intent or negligence.

Two forms of culpability

• Intent (dolo):
  • The perpetrator is aware and willful about committing the act.
  • Example: Juan runs over someone deliberately after seeing them and acting with intense dislike.
• Negligence (culpa):
  • The perpetrator commits the crime due to lack of care.
  • Example: Elena drives drunk, doesn’t realize a child runs into the road, and kills the child.

Mistake and missing subjective element

When culpability is not met due to error (mistake), the subjective element can be missing, making the act treated as atypical.

Example: Juan shoots while hunting, mistaking a person for a rabbit.

Non-imputability (not criminally responsible)

The video defines non-imputable as someone who cannot be held criminally responsible.

• Example logic: a 2-year-old using a machete—no crime because the person lacks capacity to understand wrongdoing.
• Spain-specific rule mentioned: minors under 18 are considered lacking capacity to understand wrongfulness and are therefore non-imputable (cannot be declared guilty).
• Other examples: mental disorder causing inability to understand wrongfulness. Example: Juan believes Louis is a caveman and kills him accordingly.

---

4) The action must be punishable (Punibilidad)

Meaning

Even if typical, unlawful, and culpable, the act may still not be punishable if:

• No penalty applies under the relevant norm, or
• A circumstance prevents imposing the penalty.

Example given:

• The government president commits embezzlement but cannot be convicted due to parliamentary immunity, so a penalty cannot be imposed.

---

Final consolidated rule (as stated)

To have a crime, you need:

• Typical + Unlawful + Culpable + Punishable

And:

• The “action” must be human, external, and voluntary
• Typicality is checked with objective imputation (the improper/legal risk link between conduct and result)
• Unlawfulness can be removed by justification (self-defense, necessity, duty fulfillment)
• Culpability requires intent or negligence and capacity to understand wrongdoing
• Punishability depends on whether a penalty can legally be applied in the specific case

---

Speakers / sources featured

• Carlos Rivero (speaker/host; “in this video, I’m going to summarize…”)
• Virtual Law (referred to as the channel/brand)