Defendant was upset because he was going to have to close his liquor store due to competition from a discount store in a new shopping mall nearby. In desperation, he decided to set fire to his store to collect the insurance. While looking through the basement for flammable material, he lit a match to read the label on a can. The match burned his finger and, in a reflex action, he dropped the match. It fell into a barrel and ignited some paper. Defendant made no effort to put out the fire but instead left the building. The fire spread and the store was destroyed by fire. Defendant was eventually arrested and indicted for arson. Defendant is 
guilty, if he could have put out the fire before it spread and did not do so because he wanted the building destroyed.  guilty, if he was negligent in starting the fire.  not guilty, because even if he wanted to burn the building there was no concurrence between his mens rea and the act of starting the fire.  not guilty, because his starting the fire was the result of a reflex action and not a voluntary act. 
Question: Defendant was upset because he was going to have to close his liquor store due to competition from a discount store in a new shopping mall nearby. In desperation, he decided to set fire to his store to collect the insurance. While looking through the basement for flammable material, he lit a match to read the label on a can. The match burned his finger and, in a reflex action, he dropped the match. It fell into a barrel and ignited some paper. Defendant made no effort to put out the fire but instead left the building. The fire spread and the store was destroyed by fire. Defendant was eventually arrested and indicted for arson. Defendant is 
A. guilty, if he could have put out the fire before it spread and did not do so because he wanted the building destroyed. 
B. guilty, if he was negligent in starting the fire. 
C. not guilty, because even if he wanted to burn the building there was no concurrence between his mens rea and the act of starting the fire. 
D. not guilty, because his starting the fire was the result of a reflex action and not a voluntary act. 
Answer: