Mens Rea

Question 1

Direct Intent v Oblique Intent

Answer 1

Direct - desires a prohibited consequence

Oblique - virtually certain that result would be a consequence of actions, inevitable side effect/inextricable link

Question 2

What’s the test for oblique intent and which case does it come from?

Answer 2

R v Woolin - the jury should be directed that they are not to infer the necessary intention, unless they feel sure that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty (barring some unforeseen intervention) as a result of the defendants actions and that the defendant appreciated such was the case. Jury entitled to find intent but not obliged

Question 3

Test for recklessness

Answer 3

Cunningham 1957 - aware of risk but does action anyway

If foresight includes ‘closure of mind’ to risk I.e. out of frustration - still recklessness (Parker)