Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
4 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Paragraph 1. |
Mens rea isthe mental element of an offence, meaning ‘a guilty mind’. Each offence has itsown mens rea, in exception of offences of strict liability. There are differentlevels of mens rea, the highest being intention, and the lowest beingrecklessness. To be guilty, the accused must have the minimum level of mens rearequired by the offence. With intention, the defendant’s motive or reason fordoing the act is not relevant- the important point is that the defendantdecided to bring about the prohibited consequence, as defined in the case ofMohan. |
|
|
Paragraph 2. |
There are three types of intention; direct intent, oblique intent, and recklessness.An example of direct intent is where the defendant deliberately punches another person- he had an intention to use unlawful force on the victim. Oblique intent occurs in cases where the defendant’s main aim was not the prohibited consequences, but, in achieving the aim, the defendant foresaw that he would also cause those consequences; as shown in Woollin (1998). |
|
|
Paragraph 2. -2 |
Recklessness is the taking of an unjustifiable risk; it has to be proved that the defendant realised the risk, but decided to take it. An example of recklessness occurs in R v G and R, 2003 which concerned some young boys setting fire to papers and bins. It was held that, in this case, the boys did not see the possibility of the fire spreading. |
|
|
Paragraph 3. |
Transferred malice is the principle that the defendant can be guilty if he intended to commit a similar crime but against a different victim; as shown in Latimer (1886). However, where the mens rea is for a completely different type of offence, the defendant may not be guilty- as in Pembliton (1874). |
