A business owner's retail store is failing. To escape her debts, she obtains a comprehensive insurance policy on the building and its contents. A month later, she deliberately sets fire to the store late at night. The building is located in a deserted industrial park, and no one is injured. The fire department extinguishes the fire after it causes significant charring to the structure. The owner then files an insurance claim. Under a typical modern arson statute, what is the business owner's greatest criminal liability for the act of burning?
No crime, because she owned the property and no one was endangered.
Arson, because she burned her property with the intent to defraud an insurer.
Insurance fraud only, because the burning was merely a preparatory act.
Attempted arson, because the fire was extinguished before the building was completely destroyed.
The correct answer is arson. Modern arson statutes have expanded beyond the common law definition, which required the burning of another person's dwelling. Today, statutes typically criminalize the burning of one's own property if it is done with the intent to defraud an insurance company. The crime of arson is complete upon the malicious burning (charring is sufficient), not the total destruction of the property or the successful collection of insurance money. Therefore, attempted arson is incorrect. The idea that no crime was committed because she owned the property and no one was endangered ignores the key element of fraudulent intent, which is central to modern arson laws. While she may also be guilty of insurance fraud, arson is the most direct and serious charge related to the act of burning the building.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What constitutes malicious intent in arson cases?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Are there penalties for committing arson for insurance fraud?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the difference between arson and accidental fires?