Men’s Rea pt.2 : lesson 5 Flashcards

1
Q

What are the levels of Mens Rea?

A
  • subjective recklessness
  • negligence
  • transferred malice
  • continuous acts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is subjective recklessness?

A

When the defendant is aware there is a risk of prohibited consequence but takes risk anyway

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Where does the explanation of subjective recklessness come from?

A

Cunningham 1957
- defendant tore gas meter from wall of empty house
- gas seeped into house next door where woman was affected
- charger with offence against the person act 1861 found not guilty as didn’t realise risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

How do you test for recklessness?

A

1) subjective
2) objective

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is subjective testing?

A

Whether defendant new the risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is objective testing?

A

Whether ordinary person would know the risk
- 1982-2003 defendant could be found guilty even if they didn’t realise risk (Metro police v Caldwell 1981)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are strengths of subjective recklessness?

A
  • makes defendants who didn’t know risk not liable
  • defendant having mens Rea is firmly based on subjective test
  • improvement in law
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Which case study shows subjective recklessness is an improvement in law?

A

Elliot v C
- 14yr old girl with learning disabilities spilled inflammable liquid on shed floor and dropped match
- charged under Criminal Damage Act for reckless arson
- found not guilty as she didn’t know risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are criticisms of subjective recklessness?

A
  • unfair to victims & families
  • defendants can easily avoid liability
  • conflict between public policy & legal principle
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is negligence?

A

failure to meet standards of reasonable person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are the exceptions of negligence?

A
  • Road Traffic Act 1988: driving without care
  • R v Adomako: one form of manslaughter can be committed by gross negligence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is transferred malice?

A

Defendant can be guilty if intended to commit crime against different victim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Which case study is an example of transferred malice?

A

Latimer 1886
- men were arguing in pub when one of them tried to hit the other with his belt
- hit woman next intended victim and severely injured her
- charged with Offence against the persons act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is another case study is an example of transferred malice?

A

Gnango 2011
- two men were arguing and then had a shoot out
- other man killed passer-by
- gnango convicted of her murder as he aided and agreed to shoot out

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Which case study is an example of transferred malice not being involved?

A

Pemblton 1874
- stones thrown at people he was fighting with
- hit and smashed a window
- not guilty as malice wasn’t transferred onto a person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is a continuous act?

A

When act continues mens Rea will be present

17
Q

Which case study shows a continuous act?

A

Fagan v Metropolitan
- police told defendant to park by the kerb
- Fagan accidentally ran over officers foot
- when asked to move off his foot be refused several times
- was convicted of assult on a police officer