Lecture notes
mens rea - criminal law
- Module
- Criminal Law (LAW107)
- Institution
- The University Of Liverpool (UoL)
A breakdown of the key elements of mens rea including key cases and case facts presented in a colourful format
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Mens Rea – IntroductionWhat is mens rea?
The mental element of crime: guilty minds
The state of mind the defendant must have had when committing a crime to be found
guilty of committing the crime.
Actus Reus + Mens Rea + No defense
Mens rea helps determine the blameworthiness of the offence
o D1 shoots V1 intending to cause death. V1 dies.
o D2 shoots at a target. V2 Is hiding behind the target, unbeknown to D2. V2
dies.
o It is D1’s state of mind – her intention to cause death – that renders her
blameworthy.
Concerns legal not moral guilt =/ motive
o Yip Chiu – Cheung v the Queen [1995] 1 AC 111
Relates to state of mind re: the actus reus not re: knowingly committing a crime.
R v. Esop (1863) 173 E.R.203.
Mens rea differs according to the offence:
Murder: an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm
o R v. Cunningham [1982] AC 566
o R v. Moloney [1985] AC 905
Criminal damage: intending to destroy or damage [property belonging to another]
or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged
o S.1 Criminal Damage Act 1971
Rape: A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another (B) with his
penis … A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
o S.1 Sexual Offences Act 2003
, Types of mens rea
Intention focus in this topic
Recklessness
Knowledge
Belief discussed during substantive offences
Negligence
Dishonesty
Also look at transferred malic which isn’t a type of mens rea but about mens rea.
Mens Rea – Direct Intention
Different types of intention
Direct intent Focus
Indirect/ oblique intent.
Basic intent
Specific intent intoxication
Ulterior intent – contains additional mens Rea requirement that is additional to the
mens rea attached to causing the actus reus.
What intention is not
Intention ≠ motive
o R v. Cox [1992] 122 BMLR 37.
But
o R v. Steane [1947] KB 997.
o S.28 (1)(a) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 – racially aggravated offence.
Intention ≠premeditation
Intention ≠f foresight (alone)
Where it is D’s purpose to kill, likelihood of success = irrelevant.
o Where D’s primary purpose is unclear/ does not relate to killing … foresight
of death (however high) is only evidence from which the jury might find
intention.
o R v. Hancock and Shankland [1986] AC 455.
2
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller milliegraham03. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £6.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
77254 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now