Criminal law ( Mens Rea) ( P2)

Question 1

what is men’s rea?

Answer 1

Men’s rea examines the state of mind of the defendant at the time of committing the offence.

Question 2

what are three types of mens rea?

Answer 2

1- intention
2- negligence
3- Recklesness

Question 3

intention cases

Answer 3

1- R v Woollin ( indirect )
2- Matthews and Alleyne ( indirect)
3- R v Nedrick ( direct)

Question 4

R v WOOLLEN

Answer 4

• d threw his 3-month-old baby towards his pram which was against a wall about 3 metres away. The baby suffered head injuries and dies.
  The court’s decision:
  -the consequences of Ds actions must have been a virtual certainty: and D must have realised this.

Question 5

Matthews & Allleyne

Answer 5

• D dropped V into the river knowing V could not swim V died.
• the judge directed that if the boy’s death was appreciated by the defendants as a virtual certainty then the jury should convict of murder.

Question 6

R v Nedrick

Answer 6

• A went to v house in the middle of the night, poured paraffin through her letter box and set a light to it child died In the fire.
• convicted of murder , d appealed on the grounds of mis direction.

Question 7

Recklessness cases

Answer 7

1- R v cunningham
2- R v stephenson

Question 8

R v Cunningham

Answer 8

1- D broke into the flat next door to his girlfriend with the intention of taking money from the gas meter.
- he broke the meter off the wall and took the money, in doing so he fractured the pipe which caused the escape of the gas, the gas caused his girlfriend to be semi-asphyxiated.
- he was charged with administering a noxious substance to the victim
- the court held he could only be guilty if he foresaw the type of harm that might occur and he went ahead away .
- he was not guilty since he did not realise the risk of gas escaping into the next-door house.

Question 9

R v Stephenson

Answer 9

• Stephenson was a schizophrenic, he was sleeping in a haystack and decided to light a fire to keep himself warm.
• He caused $300 damage and was prosecuted,
• court decision- his schizophrenia prevented him from realising that he had created a risk that would have been foreseen by a reasonable man,
• the subjective test was therefore applied, and he was not found guilty

Question 10

transferred malice cases

Answer 10

1- R v Mitchell
2- R v pembliton

Question 11

R v Mitchell

Answer 11

• The defendant, having become involved in an argument whilst queuing in a post office, pushed an elderly man, causing him to fall accidentally on the deceased, an elderly woman, who subsequently died in hospital from her injuries.
  -The defendant was convicted of unlawful act manslaughter.

Question 12

R v Pembliton

Answer 12

• The defendant threw some stones into a crowd of people. He wanted to disperse the crowd. A stone hit and smashed a window.
  -He was convicted of criminal damage and appealed.
• He was convicted of criminal damage and appealed. Held: Conviction quashed. His mens rea for an offence against the person could not be transferred to a property offence as they are entirely different offences.

Question 13

the coincidence of actus reus and men’s rea.
a) The series of acts rule cases

Answer 13

1- R v Thabo Meli
2- R v church

Question 14

R v Thabo Meli

Answer 14

• d got v drunk, hit him over the head and thought he was dead threw him over a cliff where he died sometime later.
• the d had men’s rea at the same time of the attack so he was guilty of the offence.

Question 15

R v Church

Answer 15

• d had a fight with a woman and knocked her out. He tried, unsuccessfully for about an hour to bring her around.
• he thought she was dead and he put her in a river. she drowned. his conviction for manslaughter was upheld.

Question 16

The continuous act case

Answer 16

r v Fagan

Question 17

R v Fagan

Answer 17

• d was pulled over by a police officer for poor driving. As he started the car to drive away he drove over the policemen’s foot.
• when he realised this, he drove off the foot very slowly
• he claimed that he had no men’s rea at the time of the assault. the court said the assault continued until he drove off the foot.