Which of the following describes a strict liability crime?

A strict liability crime is characterized by the absence of a requirement for a mental state or intent to commit the crime. This means that an individual can be held responsible for committing the crime regardless of their intentions or state of mind at the time of the offense. Strict liability offenses often pertain to regulatory or public safety laws, such as certain traffic violations or selling alcohol to minors, where the focus is on the act itself rather than the perpetrator's intent.

The key aspect of strict liability is that the prosecution does not need to prove that the offender had any guilty state of mind (or mens rea) when committing the act. This distinguishes these crimes from others that require proof of intent, such as theft or assault, where the prosecutor must establish that the defendant had a specific purpose or knowledge relating to the crime.

Other options presented discuss elements that involve intent, penalties, or types of damage, which do not align with the fundamental principle of strict liability. Thus, the correct understanding of a strict liability crime reinforces the idea that the mere commission of the act is enough for liability, irrespective of the offender's intentions.