---
esco_uri: http://data.europa.eu/esco/skill/8836a5a5-e2ff-4baf-aae3-bfb78a4cca7f
esco_label: "criminal law"
relation: optional
onet_soc: 23-1011.00
source: stackexchange
confidence: high
qa_count: 5
generator: gemma3:27b (prompt-designed and spot-checked by Claude)
generated: 2026-07-10
---

# criminal law — Legal Counsel

As Legal Counsel, 'Criminal Law' competence isn’t about *conducting* criminal investigations or prosecutions – it’s about anticipating and mitigating criminal risk for your client (typically a corporation or institution). Daily tasks revolve around advising on policies & procedures to avoid liability. This means reviewing contracts for clauses that could lead to accusations of fraud, ensuring compliance with regulations impacting safety (think product liability potentially leading to manslaughter charges), and responding to allegations *against* the organization – from employee misconduct to potential regulatory breaches with criminal penalties. You'll frequently use legal research databases (Westlaw, LexisNexis) to analyze statutes, case law, and understand evolving interpretations of offenses like fraud, assault, or environmental crimes.

## Praxiswissen (Stack Exchange, CC-BY-SA 4.0)

**A high school chemistry teacher discovered a student intentionally put a pill into their coffee, causing physical symptoms and requiring medical evaluation. The teacher is frustrated that the school resource officer downplayed the incident as not being 'criminal' enough to warrant serious charges.**

Even if a substance isn’t a traditionally ‘controlled’ drug, administering *anything* harmful or unwanted to another person can legally constitute battery – an intentional act of harm. Beyond criminal charges, educators have avenues for pursuing disciplinary action through the school system itself, potentially leading to expulsion. It's crucial to understand that witnessing a crime and failing to intervene is different than actively assisting in its commission, which *is* illegal.

*Source: [A student slipped a drug into my coffee — what are the legal ramifications of th](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/33212) — answer by user6726, CC-BY-SA 4.0*

**The question explores whether a bank robbery committed *without* explicit threats should be considered legally distinct from simply asking for money, questioning why it's treated as a serious crime instead of something like soliciting donations.**

Legally differentiating between theft and robbery hinges on the presence of force or implied threat. While a polite request for funds might seem harmless, handing someone a bag *and* requesting they fill it constitutes deceptive action aimed at gaining control of property – this is legally considered 'theft' even without overt threats. The key isn’t necessarily what is said, but the actions taken to induce transfer of ownership and whether those actions involve deception or coercion.

*Source: [Why shouldn't a bank robbery without threats be legal?](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/33592) — answer by user6726, CC-BY-SA 4.0*

**The question explores how the act of Gretel pushing a witch into an oven, intending to kill her to save herself and her brother from being eaten, would be legally interpreted under modern U.S. law, specifically regarding self-defense claims.**

Legal defenses like self-defense aren't automatically granted; courts meticulously examine the circumstances surrounding the act. A key consideration is whether a reasonable opportunity to escape existed before resorting to lethal force, and whether the aggressor had any legal justification for their actions. Even if an initial detention seems lawful, prolonged confinement with harmful intent can negate that legality, shifting the focus back to the defender's right to protect themselves.

*Source: [How would the actions of Hänsel and Gretel in the Grimm tale be interpreted in m](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/48441) — answer by hszmv, CC-BY-SA 4.0*

**The asker's friend borrowed their guitar which was then stolen by the asker’s ex-partner; they are considering entering the ex-partner’s home with family permission while he is away to retrieve it and want to know if this would be illegal.**

While retrieving personal property isn't inherently illegal, navigating the situation legally involves understanding distinctions like 'civil assist,' repossession (if applicable), and replevin. Obtaining consent to enter a property avoids issues of trespassing, but pursuing legal avenues such as filing charges for theft or a civil claim could provide further recourse. Even if you recover your property, the act of stealing it still constitutes a crime that can be pursued legally.

*Source: [Stealing my own property back?](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/31510) — answer by ohwilleke, CC-BY-SA 4.0*

**The questioner observes that stealing from an employer typically leads to criminal charges, while failing to pay an employee often results in civil litigation, and asks for the historical/legal reasoning behind this difference.**

The distinction lies in the legal definition of 'theft,' which requires the permanent deprivation of someone's *possession*. Withholding earned wages isn’t theft because the employee never actually had full possession of the funds – it’s a failure to fulfill a contractual obligation. While historically non-payment of debts could be criminalized, modern legal systems generally treat it as a civil matter, though this is potentially evolving with discussions around 'wage theft' being redefined as a crime.

*Source: [Why is stealing from an employer a criminal act when stealing from an employee i](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/63850) — answer by Dale M, CC-BY-SA 4.0*

## Weitere Anreicherung

Stage-2 source for future practitioner grounding: CORE / DOAB (open-access law monographs).
