Mens Rea Flashcards
Mens Rea (State of Mind)
Acts (or omissions) alone cannot amount to a crime unless they are accompanied by ‘mens rea’ at the time of the act (or omission).
Offences of ‘Specific’ Intent
Crimes of ‘specific’ intent are only committed where the defendant is shown to have had a particular intention to bring about a specific consequence at the time of the criminal act.
Offences of ‘Specific’ Intent example
Murder is such a crime as is burglary. The common feature with these offences is that the intention of the offender is critical – without that intent, the offence does not exist.
Offences of ‘Basic’ Intent
Other criminal offences require no further proof of anything other than the ‘basic’ intention to bring about the given circumstances.
Offences of ‘Basic’ Intent example
Burglary simply requires proof that the person entered the building/part of a building as a trespasser and that he/she went on to commit an imprisonable offence (steals/attempts to steal; inflicting/attempting to inflict GBH). Another example would be the offence of wounding or GBH
Difference between offences of specific and basic intent
The important is that, in the case of basic intent, recklessness will often be enough to satisfy the mental element.
Intent
If a defendant intends something to happen, he/she wishes to bring about a consequence. In some offences, say burglary, the defendant’s intention may be very clear; he/she may enter a house as a trespasser intending to steal property inside.
Foresight
The defendant may argue that, although he/she intended to break in and steal, there had never been any intention of harming the occupant. At this point you might say that the defendant should have thought about that before.
Probability foresight
The greater the probability of a consequence, the more likely it is that the defendant foresaw that consequence
If the defendant foresaw that consequence, the more likely it is that the defendant intended it to happen.
Subjective Recklessness
Situations where the defendant foresees the consequences of his/her actions as being probable or even possible.
Subjective recklessness means that the fact that the consequences ought to have been foreseen by the defendant will not be enough.
test of recklessness (Biting of officer during arrest example)
It involved the defendant having foreseen the risk that the victim would be subjected to unlawful force and having gone on to take the risk.
Transferred Mens Rea
The state of mind required for one offence can, on occasions, be ‘transferred’ from the original target to another. This only operates if the crime remains the same. In other words, a defendant cannot be convicted if he/she acted with the mens rea for one offence but commits the actus reus of another offence.
Transferred Mens Rea example - if the crime remains the same
The defendant lashed out with his belt at one person but missed, striking a third party instead. If the defendant had the required mens rea when he swung the belt, the Court could hold that the same mens rea could support a charge of wounding against any other victim injured by the same act.
Transferred Mens Rea example - nature of the offence changes
If the nature of the offence changes, the approach will not operate. If a defendant is shown to have thrown a rock at a crowd of people intending to injure one of them, the mens rea required for that offence cannot be ‘transferred’ to an offence of criminal damage if the rock misses that person and breaks a window instead.
Importance of transferred mens rea
It is Important in relation to the liability of accessories. If the principal offender’s intentions are to be extended to an accessory, it must be shown that those intentions were either, contemplated and accepted by that person at the time of the offence, or that they were ‘transferred’.
