Mens Rea

Question 1

What is actual intention

Answer 1

where D actually intends to bring about a certain circumstance;

Question 2

What is oblique intention

Answer 2

where D foresees the result as a natural consequence of their act as virtually certain or inevitable but does not actually intend

Question 3

Jury should not be directed on intent it should be left up to their common sense but if they need to be:

Answer 3

1. Natural conequence of act
2. forsee the conseequence

Question 4

Case on pharmacist supplying heaps of codeine

Answer 4

Wentworth: Intention can be equated with foresight. Here, Wentworth had foresight and therefore intention so was guilty.

Question 5

intention (breach of parenting order)

Answer 5

Police v K (parenting order breach) Motive does not need to be proved on top of intent

Question 6

Knowledge

Answer 6

Knowledge requires actual knowledge, mere suspicion is not enough.

Question 7

knowledge case - flatmate received stolen goods

Answer 7

Crooks - “A person is said to know something when he has ascertained, by physical or mental perception, a state of facts or circumstances which creates in his mind a certainty that the point of his inquiry is free from doubt”. Willful blindness also equates to knowledge.

Question 8

knowledge case - convicted of importing heroin

Answer 8

Martin: Once there is a suspicion and a blind eye is turned, the law will handle it not the jury

Question 9

Recklessness

Answer 9

Martin. when D knows there is a risk and runs it although it is unreasonable.

Question 10

recklessness (shooting set up)

Answer 10

Tiiple: There was ample evidence that the target practice endangered others (especially on the road) and that D appreciated that but proceeded regardless. Appeal dismissed.

Question 11

recklessness (shot drone)

Answer 11

Hei Hei: Did he actually and consciously appreciate the risk to a persons safety at the time of firing the gun? Judge was not satisfied, said evidence suggested he acted impulsively w/o considering consequences.

Question 12

Recklessness (fire while stealing car)

Answer 12

Hay had taken precautions to minimise risk and did not think it would happen which caused the courts to find he did not act recklessly. He saw risk, and undertook alternate act.

Question 13

Recklessness (imported heroin in suitcase)

Answer 13

Martin: Just as with consequences, recklessness as to circumstances requires that the defendant acts believing that there is a possibility, or risk that the circumstance might exist

Question 14

Recklessness (drove in bad temper after talking to cop)

Answer 14

D’almeida: here did not have an appreciation of the risk of her actions when driving in bad temper

Question 15

Recklessness (killed someone with boon of digger)

Answer 15

Jones: Did not satisfy the requirement he did not know it was a real possibility his actions would bring about the proscribed result

Question 16

Test for recklessness

Answer 16

Cameron:
a) The defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
i. His or her actions would bring about the proscribed result;
and/or
ii. That the proscribed circumstances existed; and

b) Having regard to that risk, those actions were unreasonable.