Mens rea

Question 1

What is mens rea

Answer 1

The mental element of a crime

Question 2

What are the 4 different levels of mens rea

Answer 2

Direct intent, oblique intent, subjective recklessness and negligence

Question 3

What is direct intent

Answer 3

The D has the desired outcome in mind, you meant to do what you did

Question 4

What case supports direct intent

Answer 4

Mohan

Question 5

What is oblique intent

Answer 5

The outcome is a ‘virtual certainty’ and the defendant should realise this

Question 6

What case supports oblique intent

Answer 6

Woolin

Question 7

What is subjective recklessness

Answer 7

D must realise there is a risk of the consequence happening but decided to do it anyway

Question 8

What case supports subjective recklessness

Answer 8

Cunningham

Question 9

What is negligence

Answer 9

D has committed negligence/ wrongdoing which has resulted in the Vs injury death

Question 10

What is the case that supports negligence

Answer 10

Adamako

Question 11

What are the three principles under mens rea

Answer 11

Transferred malice, strict liability and coincidence rule

Question 12

What is transferred malice

Answer 12

D can be criminally liable if they have the necessary mens rea to commit the crime but it just occurs against an unintended victim

Question 13

What is a case that supports transferred malice

Answer 13

Latimer

Question 14

What is the coincidence rule

Answer 14

The D can be guilty even if the mens rea and actus reus don’t occur at the same time

Question 15

How many types of coincidence rules are there

Answer 15

2

Question 16

What is the first type of coincidence rule

Answer 16

The offence happened, the defendant didn’t know they were committing it however when they found out they continued (the mens rea became present after the actus reus)

Question 17

What case supports the first type of coincidence rule

Answer 17

Fagan v MPC

Question 18

What is the second type of coincidence rule

Answer 18

The defendant had the mens rea of an offence but the actus reus did not happen until later, the mens rea will continue throughout if they are both a part of the same series of events

Question 19

What case supports the second type of coincidence rule

Answer 19

Thabo Melo

Question 20

What are strict liability offences

Answer 20

They are crimes that don’t require proof of mens rea

Question 21

What is an example of a strict liability offence

Answer 21

Speeding, driving without insurance…

Question 22

What case sets out the 5 factors the courts must consider with strict liability offences

Answer 22

Gammon ltd v AG of Hong Kong

Question 23

What is set out in the case of gammon

Answer 23

Start with presumption MR is required for all offences (Sweet v Parsley), presumption stronger for truer crimes (B v DPP), presumption rebutted if there is evidence that Parliament wanted the crime to be a strict liability offence. Example being ‘intent’ omitted from a section but included it in other sections, then courts should presume Parliament did not add the word ‘intent’ on purpose as to make the crime a strict liability crime, presumption rebutted in cases of social concern – activity causes pollution then courts should look at intention/ recklessness, presumption is rebutted if making the offence a strict liability offence will assist in prevent in from occurring.

Question 24

Case that supports strict liability offences

Answer 24

Sweet V parsley