Which of the following is NOT a criterion for determining a defendant's responsibility for a criminal act?

The determination of a defendant's responsibility for a criminal act involves assessing several criteria that can affect a person's culpability. Among these, actus reus, or the physical act of committing a crime, is essential, as it establishes that a wrongful act occurred. The presence of actus reus is typically a foundational element for any criminal charge, indicating that the defendant engaged in behavior that is explicitly prohibited by law.

Absence of mens rea, which refers to the mental state or intent behind committing the crime, is a key aspect of legal responsibility. If a defendant can demonstrate a lack of mens rea, meaning they did not possess the requisite intent or knowledge that their actions were wrong, it can serve as a defense against criminal liability.

Mental disease or defect is another critical criterion that courts consider. If a defendant has a diagnosed mental disorder that impairs their ability to understand the nature of their actions or to distinguish right from wrong, this can absolve them of responsibility for criminal conduct.

Lastly, an inability to tell right from wrong, particularly in the context of mental illness, is a significant factor in evaluating a defendant's responsibility. This concept is often rooted in the legal standard known as the insanity defense, which addresses whether a defendant could discern their actions