Elements of a Crime - Mens Rea Flashcards
Why do we have mens rea?
To ensure only blameworthy defendants are punished
What is mens rea?
Legal term used to describe elements of offence that relates to D’s mental state
Standards of Mens rea
- Intention
- Recklessness
- Negligence
- Knowledge
Mens rea - 2 methods of culpability
- Objective: D’s conduct fell below the standards to the ordinary reasonable person
- Subjective: D held a state of mind at the time of the offence that was blameworthy
Assault definition
D intentionally or recklessly causes V to apprehend imminent unlawful contact
Murder definition
D kills V with the intention to kill or cause GBH
Criminal damage definition
D intentionally or recklessly destroys or damages property belonging to another
Capacity for under 10 years old
Irrefutable presmuption of doli incapax
Doli incapax defintion
A presumption in the law that a child is incapable of forming criminal intent to commit an offence
Intention definition
- Ordinary meaning of work, not ‘desire’ or ‘motive’
- Judge should avoid elaboration, leave jury to good sense - Moloney [1985]
- Intention does not require premeditation
Intention v foresight
Intention is distinguished from foresight, but is evidence from which jury may find or infer intention: Hyam v DPP [1975]
Oblique intention
D does not consciously aim to bring about a particular consequence but has knowledge that in doing something else he is liable to cause that consequence
Defining oblique intention
A person should be taken to intend a result if he or she acts in order to bring it about
Recklessness definition
The responsibility line is drawn according to an evaluation of the nature of the activity and the degree of the risk
Recklessness has three parts…
- D has awareness
- Of any degree of risk
- Taking that risk is unjustified or unreasonable
Caldwell abolished by…
R v G and R [2004] abolished Caldwell recklessness for criminal damage offences
Recklessness; criticisms
- Does G make it too easy for defendant to claim that they did not consider a risk to others to be so entitled to acquittal?
- Should an alternative to both Cunningham and Caldwell recklessness have been considered?
Recklessness: criticisms (2)
- D would have been reckless if they were aware if a risk or fail to consider a risk which should have been obvious to a reasonable person for their age and mental abilities
- D would be reckless if they were aware of a risk or fail to consider an obvious risk, without good explanation
Negligence: definition
- D has behaved in a way in which a reasonable person would not have behaved
- A form of culpable carelessness
Negligence Criteria
- Inadvertent
- Objective: D is negligent as to a circumstance relevant to his conduct if he ought to have been aware of its existence because a reasonable person would have thought the risk might exist
Is negligence liability fair?
- No: doesn’t account for autonomy, individual difference and capacity, doesn’t reflect a real social standard, involves non-moral form of wrongdoing, it is unclear and uncertain
- Yes: It applies to those who could and should do better, who choose to undertake an obligation and who have good reasons for doing otherwise
Negligence is where D…
‘failed to comply with a standard of conduct with which any ordinary man could and would have complied’ (Hart 1968)
Strict liability
Some offences require no mens rea - just completion of the actus reus
Presumption in favour of mens rea
Do strict liability offences contravene Art 6 ECHR?
Relationship of AR to MR
The general rule is captured by the correspondence principle - fault should correspond to conduct or consequence
Exception of Relationship of AR to MR
A. Constructive crimes
B. Dutch courage
C. Transferred malice
D. ‘Continuing acts’
Transferred malice/mens rea
- Fault may be transferred within the same class of offence
- When the fault is transferred, any defence d may have is also transferred with it
Continuing acts cases
Fagan v MPC [1969]
Miller [1983]
Thabo Meli [1954]
Church [1966]
Le Brun [1992]
