Mens Rea Flashcards
Cawthorne v HMA 1968
A man fired a rifle shots from outside to the room where he knew were people. He was charged with attempted murder. He acted with utter and wicked recklessness to the consequences of his act. It was unnecessary to prove that the accused intended to kill, mens rea was proved by his reckless disregard of consequences.
Quinn v Lees 1995
The man was charged with setting his dog on three boys. He defence himself saying that this was a joke.
The court refused the appeal on the ground that the dog cannot differentiate between a joke and instruction. Therefore this was deliberate act with predictable consequences.
R v Moloney 1985
The man was drinking with his stepfather. The defendant a serving soldier. He faster do outload, outshot etc. He said he did not aim he just trigger the gun and then his stepfather was dead. he was convicted and appeal refused.
Roberts v Hamilton 1989
She intended to hit one person but hit another. On the defence she said she lucked necessary mens rea. The court refused the appeal on the ground that whether the matter was approached on the transfer intent or just from the result which happened - the sheriff was entitled to find her guilty.
W v HMA 1982
14-year old boy throw a bottle from the 15th floor and seriously injured the man. He was convicted and his appeal was refused in regards to his wicked disregards as to the consequences of his act.
Thabo Meli v R 1954
The man was took to the hut and struck on the head, the accused thought he was dead and roll him over of the cliff, and make everything looks like accident. The medical evidence showed that the man did not die form the struck but from leaving him under the cliff. On the defence they said that the had necessary mens rea when they struck him on the head but not during leaving him under the cliff. Charged with murder. The court held that it is impossible to divide it as it was one transaction.
Fagan v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police 1968
The policeman wishing question the man directed him in the place. The man drove over the policeman’s foot. After few times repeating ‘get off my foot’ the man moved the car. He was charged with the assault. Dismissing the appeal. There was an assault - battery it could be inflicted by medium of weapon and control of it by man.
