State Of Mind Flashcards
In regards to A strict liability offence, are both mens rea and actus reus required as usual?
No. Only actus reus is required.
What are the 2 levels of mens rea?
Intent & recklessness.
Ross intend to punch joey and cause him serious harm. Joey ducks and Ross punches Gunther who was standing behind Joey.
Would Ross be guilty of the offence? Would he of had the mens rea?
Yes. This would be transferred mens rea. Ross has the intent (mens rea) to cause serious harm to Joey, as Gunther suffered the actus reus of really serious harm. There is a coincidence of the actus reus and the mens rea meaning he has committed the offence.
James trips up lucy thinking she will fall and graze her knee. She ends up breaking her arm causing a more serious injury? Has james acted maliciously ?
Yes. He foresaw some harm being caused to lucy (grazing her knee) it doesn’t matter that he didn’t foresee a more serious injury.
A person will have acted negligently if their actions fell below the standard that could be expected of who?….
A reasonable person.
In regards to strict liability, there will never need to be proof of mens rea, unless… ??
Parliament clearly indicates otherwise.
In regards to negligence, there HAS to be a blame element and the defendants compliance of standards of reasonableness of….
Ordinary people.
In relation to the term wilful, how must you act ?
Intentionally / subjectively recklessly
In relation to the defence of insanity. Where the defendant was suffering from a disease of the mind, will this be a question of medical opinion or a question of law ?
This will be a question of law.
If Euan shoots KHAN as he thought he had a gun and was going to shoot him, what must Euan show in regards to his actions ?
That his use of lethal force (actions) was absolutely necessary in the circumstances
What is strict liability ?
There is little to prove beyond the act itself. The state of mind of the defendant is immaterial. (Think drink drive)
In relation to automatism, how do you describe the loss of voluntary control ?
The question is not whether the accused is acting consciously or not but whether there is a complete destruction of voluntary control.
