MPC rules of construction

Laws are often unclear about what mental state applies at all or to a particular element. The MPC provides rules to help determine the mental state (e.g., purposely or recklessly) for any given element. They work almost like computer algorithms: you apply them like formulas to the situation. They will seem opaque at first until we appy them to numerous examples. 

Though they seem like sterile formulas, try to understand the reasoning behind them. They attempt to capture how ordinary language works, how we think about culpablity, and how law has traditionally treated certain topics. 

Before quoting the full text below, we can summarize the three main provisions as follows. First, if the statute is silent as to the mens rea for an element, use recklessly. Second, if there is a mens rea term in the statute, it often applies to all the elements (depending). Third, if the defendant has a culpability higher in the hierarchy like purpose, that will satisfy a statutory mens rea that is lower such as recklessly. 

Behind these specific rules lies a fundamental principle that pervades the MPC: a hostility to strict liability for any element. Unless the legislature expressly provides for strict liability (as in Alvarez, above), the MPC urges courts to insert at least some mens rea for each element--recklessly by default. As the authors put it in the commentary, the MPC in "Subsection (1) articulates the Code's insistence that an element of culpability is requisite for any valid criminal conviction."