Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 52 (2020) Crime as Cognitive Constraint knowingly providing practical assistance or encouragement that has a substantial effect on the commission of a crime. 214 The finding of guilt depended on whether the accused possessed actual or constructive knowledge based on the circumstances. 215 The implication of this for corporate criminal liability is to adopt a mode of determining culpability for corporate entities, which inherently act through natural persons. There are different models for conceptualizing corporate behavior to be repurposed for prosecution. 216 Michael J. Kelly, for instance, adheres to the view of attributing the acts and knowledge of the corporate officer to the corporate entity. 217 As applied to the I.G. Farben case, this would make use of a “complicity standard of knowledge to impute parts of what each individual defendant knew to a unified whole on the part of the company.” 218 This can be traced through “corporate minutes, transactional records, and aggressive cross-examination.” 219 Recall that in the previous section I discussed the two distinct elements of incitement – that communication must be direct and public. These elements reveal that the crime of incitement places the onus of liability on the individual speaker. There is no distinction between publishers and broadcasters from a criminal lens; all content producers are considered inciters. Julius Streicher was convicted at the Nuremberg Tribunal of crimes against humanity 220 for publishing speeches and articles that actively called for the annihilation of Jews, portraying them as a group deserving to be “exterminated root and branch.” 221 In accomplice-liability.html [https://perma.cc/FC48-SMTN] (last visited Feb. 5, 2020). 214. CORPORATE COMPLICITY REPORT, supra note 195, at 17, 21–22. But see Rome Statute, supra note 6, at art. 25(3)(c) (appearing to heighten the standard by requiring that the aider or abettor possess the “purpose of facilitating the commission of the crime”). 215. Oona A. Hathaway et al., Aiding and Abetting in International Criminal Law, 104 CORNELL L. REV. 1593, 1614 (2019). 216. See Kaeb, supra note 196, at 384-85; Carsten Stahn, supra note 192, at 96-97. 217. Michael J. Kelly, Atrocities by Corporate Actors: A Historical Perspective, 50 CASE W. RES. J. INT’L L. 49, 76-77 (2018). 218. Id. at 76. 219. Id. 220. See Julius Streicher, TRIAL INTERNATIONAL, https://trialinternational.org/latest-post/juliusstreicher/ [https://perma.cc/3RTV-EXNW] (ast visited Feb. 6, 2020). At that time, there was no crime of incitement to genocide under international law. 221. International Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal: Nuremberg 14 November 1945 – 1 October 1946 Vol. 1, at 302-303 (1947), 179