Week 2 Mens Rea The defendant’s mental state. Mens Rea and Actus Reus are necessary for a crime; apart from in strict liability crimes when mens rea is not necessary. Different crimes have different mens rea. Example: murder requires intention to cause death or GBH. Sometimes an offence will have different mens rea for different aspects of the crime. Example: rape needs intention to commit sexual intercourse but only needs recklessness as to whether the victim is consenting
Premium Criminal law
… there was no act on the part of the appellant which could constitute an actus reus‚ but only the omission or failure to remove the wheel as soon as he was asked. That failure‚ it is said‚ could not in law be an assault‚ nor could it in law provide the necessary mens rea to convert the original act of mounting the foot into an assault. Counsel for the respondent argues that the first mounting of the foot was an actus reus‚ which act continued until the moment of time at which the wheel was removed
Premium Automobile
Burden of Proof 4 1. Legal/Persuasive Burden of Proof 4 2. Evidential Burden 4 3. Section 11(d) violation 4 4. Section 1 5 Actus Reus 5 A. Act or Omission 6 R. v. Instan 6 People v. Beardsley 6 R. v. Thornton 7 R. v. Urbanovich 7 R. v. Ssenyonga 7 B. Voluntariness 8 C. Causation 8 R. v. Smithers 8 R. v. Duncan 9 R. v. Johnston 9 R. v. Nette 9 R. v. Blaue 9 R. v. Cribbin 9 R. v. Harbottle 10 Mens Rea
Premium Jury Law Appeal
Legal Defenses Barbara Butler CJS/220 2/1/13 Harvey Smith Introduction This paper will give brief description on three types of legal defenses and the elements of a crime‚ how the crime applies to the overall criminal procedure. It also will give a definition to what each element means. Legal Defenses and Their Definition A legal defense is one that satisfies all legal requirements of a court case. The three legal defenses I will be describing are insanity‚ self-defense‚ and mistake of
Premium Criminal law Crime Criminal justice
2014/10/3 Criminal Law Hanif Mughal (麥 嘉 豪 ) Adjunct Associate Professor ( 兼任教授) Barrister-at-law ( 大律師 ) DLS 2 BRIEF - Lecture 2 (A) Principles of Criminal Liability Chapters 2 and 4 of the Workbook and some additional information 2 Mens Rea consists of : 1. 2. 3. Intention Recklessness Gross Negligence The crime will specify the kind of mens rea required. 3 1 2014/10/3 (i) Intention How does the prosecution prove intention? There can be: (i) Direct proof; or (ii) Indirect proof.
Premium Criminal law
criminal law‚ it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of some crimes. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase‚ actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea‚ which means "the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty". Thus‚ in jurisdictions with due process‚ there must be an actus reus‚ or "guilty act‚" accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged (see the technical requirement of concurrence).
Premium Criminal law Mens rea Common law
prosecution must establish the facts and elements of each crime to prove a defendant’s guilt. The elements of crime are the basic components of the crime‚ and the essential features of that crime specified by law or statute. These elements include actus reus‚ mens rea‚ and a concurrence of the two. To convict the defendant of a particular crime‚ the prosecution must establish that each of the required elements are present in the facts to prove criminal liability (Schmalleger‚ Hall‚ & Dolatowski
Free Criminal law Murder
the following matters: a) The essential legal elements involved in a financial crime and the effect of their presence or absence in such crime. A person cannot usually be found guilty of a criminal offence unless two elements are present: an actus reus‚ Latin for guilty act; and mens rea‚ Latin for guilty mind. Both these terms actually refer to more than just moral guilt‚ and each has a very specific meaning‚ which varies according to the crime‚ but the important thing to remember is that to
Premium Criminal law
Common Assault (Technical Assault) This is a common law offence. Actus Reus- D causes V to apprehend immediate physical violence. (fear must be there and then R v Lamb) R v Fagan Events are viewed from V’s prospective‚ not the reasonable person’s. Smith v Chief supt woking police (1983) Assault may be committed by words alone. R v Burstow‚ R v Ireland. Mens Rea- Intention to cause V to apprehendd immediate harm or recklessness as to whether V may apprehend immediate harm. R v Savage ‚ R v Paramenter
Premium Criminal law Theft
respect of the first attack on father and also Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm contrary to Common Law and punishable under s. 39 of that Ordinance.‚ in respect of the second attack. Discuss the 8-part test in respect of each offence: 1) actus reus; 2) mens rea; 3) Co-existence of 1) and 2) 4) Voluntary acts 5) Factual Causation 6) Legal Causation 7) Any novus causus interveniens 8) Absence of a lawful defence The Two Offences s. 17 Cap. 212 Any person who-
Premium Criminal law