Preterintentional crime as a distinct legal concept is found chiefly in penal systems of the civil law tradition.
In modern times many legal systems have ceased to impose separate criminal liability for preterintentional crimes.
The judge can condemn the agent for the preterintentional crime caused by the intentional criminal conduct, even if only attempted.
[43] The concept of preterintentional crime is found primarily in legal systems of the civil law tradition.
[56] Many civil law legal systems have rejected preterintentional offenses and the underlying doctrine of versari in re illicita, as reflecting a strict liability approach incompatible with modern constitutional guarantees.
[61][62] Other countries in which preterintentional crimes were formerly recognized but have been abolished or greatly limited include South Africa[63] and Botswana,[64] both of which rejected the traditional versari principle in the 1960s as embodying a form of strict liability not compatible with modern approaches to criminal law.
[65] The courts of Zimbabwe and Namibia have similarly adopted a requirement that a defendant foresee the reasonable possibility of the preterintentional harm occurring.
[66] Countries of the common law tradition have typically followed a comparatively flexible approach to preterintentional crimes.
This approach is justified based on the doctrines of "unforeseen mode", "mistaken object", and "transferred fault".