Explica cómo el estado mental de un autor es relevante para la culpabilidad en la comisión de un delito
In jurisprudence, animus nocendi (from Latin animus 'mind', and noceo 'to harm') is the subjective state of mind of the perpetrator of a crime, with reference to the exact knowledge of illegal content of his behaviour, and of its possible consequences.

In most modern legal systems, the animus nocendi is required as an essential condition to give a penal condemnation.

The animus nocendi is usually demonstrated by the verified presence of these elements:

knowledge of a law that prohibited the discussed action or conduct (unless there exists a systemic obligation, pending on every citizen, that considers that the law has to be known by every adult — in this case the knowledge is presumed a priori; see also Ignorantia juris non excusat);
knowledge of the most likely consequences of his action;

precise intention of breaking the law or of causing the verified effects of the action.
When the author of the crime had no animus nocendi, it is usually considered that the crime still exists, but the author is innocent, unless a responsibility for guilt can be found in his conduct: the typical case of a car accident in which a wrong or even hazardous manoeuvre causes personal injuries to another car driver, is then managed as a crime for the presence of injuries, yet the author will not be prosecuted as the author of the injuries (he did not want to hurt the other driver, thus he had no animus nocendi), but simply as the author of a dangerous conduct that indirectly caused said effects, and would be held responsible at a guilt title.
En la mayoría de los sistemas jurídicos, es necesario demostrar que el autor de un delito tuvo intención de dañar, también conocido por el término jurídico "animus nocendi" (del latín animus "mente" y noceo "dañar"). Dicho claramente, esto significa tener conocimiento previo de la ilegalidad de su acto y de las repercusiones del delito. La intención es importante para establecer la culpabilidad de un delito concreto. Un buen ejemplo es la muerte en un accidente de coche: el conductor responsable sería culpable de causar la muerte accidental de la víctima (homicidio involuntario), pero no culpable de asesinato, a menos que pudiera demostrarse que el conductor culpable tenía intención de matar a la víctima.