A former construction worker became intoxicated one night and decided to move some heavy construction equipment that was parked at a construction site. Ignoring "no trespassing" signs, the worker jumped the fence and climbed into a large dump truck and started it up. However, even though he knew how to operate the truck, he quickly lost control of it due to his intoxication. It rumbled a short distance and crashed into a trailer housing the main office of the construction site. The worker is prosecuted for recklessly damaging property. A separate statute in the jurisdiction prohibited the unauthorized operation of construction equipment. Should the worker be found guilty of recklessly damaging property?

The possible answers are:

A. Yes, because his actions constituted an unlawful operation of the construction equipment.

B. Yes, because he was intoxicated while attempting to move the construction equipment.

C. No, because at most he could be found guilty of criminal negligence.

D. No, because he must have been aware that his conduct would cause the damage to the trailer in order to be found guilty of reckless damage.

The correct answer is:

B. Yes, because he was intoxicated while attempting to move the construction equipment.

Explanation:

The worker should be found guilty, since he was aware of being intoxicated from the beginning of the action, knowing in advance that when operating the heavy construction equipment there would be a great threat for the people and properties around. Besides, he was also aware about the alarming signs, due to the fact that he could not reach the dum truck normally, he had to jump the fence to reach it, increasing the risk with his actions.