2. Mens Rea Flashcards
Two types of intention
Direct Intention
Oblique / Indirect Intention
Direct Intention
- X was the defendant’s aim or purpose (what they set out to do)
Indirect / oblique Intent
- was the consequence virtually certain to occur from D’s act or omission (objective assessment for the jury)
- If yes, did D appreciate that the consequences were virtually certain to occur (subjective assessment)
Can D have direct intention if they set out to do something, but believe they have a low likelihood of succeeding?
Yes, prospect of success is irrelevant
Recklessness
Defendant is aware of the relevant risk and goes on, WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION to take that risk anyways
- issue of ‘justification’ is objective
- D’s awareness of the risk is subjective
Crimes of Negligence: MR
- NO MR here
- Guilt is determined by an assessment of whether D fell below the standard of a reasonable person
Strict Liability Offences
No MR required for one or more AR elements of the offence
- Should be clear on face of statute
- Higher the stigma / penalty, less likely it is to be strict liability
Doctrine of Transferred Malice
IF D has an MR towards one person / object, this can be ‘transferred’ to the AR committed against a different person or object IF THE OFFENCE IS THE SAME
What will the court do if D has MR at some time during a series of acts but not at the time the crime is committed?
Courts can treat series of acts as continuing act / single transaction if they are criminal acts
Basic Intent Crimes
One that can be proven by intention or recklessness
Specific Intent Crimes
One where only intention suffices to satisfy the MR
Ulterior Intent Crimes
MR Requirements go ‘beyond’ AR that the prosecution have to prove
- eg. aggravated criminal damage (AR relates to damaging criminal property, whereas MR relates to this and endangering a person)
