3. Mens rea

2021 ◽  
pp. 85-129
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Type Question ◽  
Legal Meaning

This chapter provides an overview of mens rea, loosely translated as ‘guilty mind’. Whereas the concept of actus reus focusses on the external elements of an offence, mens rea focusses on state of mind or fault. The mens rea of the offence describes the fault element with which D acted: D intended, believed, foresaw as a risk of the proscribed element; and so on. The chapter first considers how offences differ in the role mens rea plays. For some offences a mens rea element may be required in relation to each actus reus element; for other offences there are actus reus elements that do not have a corresponding mens rea and vice versa. The chapter moves on to discuss the legal meaning of central mens rea terms such as ‘intention’, ‘negligence’, ‘dishonesty’, and ‘recklessness’. Finally, it outlines reform debates, and a structure for analysing the mens rea of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter.

3. Mens rea

2019 ◽  
pp. 82-126
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Type Question ◽  
Legal Meaning

This chapter provides an overview of mens rea, loosely translated as ‘guilty mind’. Whereas the actus reus of an offence focuses on the accused’s conduct, the results of that conduct, and the circumstances in which it takes place (external elements), mens rea focuses on what is going on in the accused’s mind (internal elements). The chapter first considers the elements of criminal liability under mens rea versus actus reus before discussing the legal meaning of central mens rea terms such as ‘intention’, ‘negligence’, ‘dishonesty’, and ‘recklessness’ and how these terms work in the context of a whole offence. It also describes certain offences that require actus reus elements with no corresponding mens rea and vice versa. Finally, it outlines a structure for analysing the mens rea of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter.

3. Mens rea

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Type Question ◽  
Legal Meaning

This chapter provides an overview of mens rea, loosely translated as ‘guilty mind’. Whereas the actus reus of an offence focuses on the accused’s conduct, the results of that conduct, and the circumstances in which it takes place (external elements), mens rea focuses on what is going on in the accused’s mind (internal elements). The chapter first considers the elements of criminal liability under mens rea versus actus reus before discussing the legal meaning of central mens rea terms such as ‘intention’, ‘negligence’, ‘dishonesty’, and ‘recklessness’ and how these terms work in the context of a whole offence. It also describes certain offences that require actus reus elements with no corresponding mens rea and vice versa. Finally, it outlines a structure for analysing the mens rea of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter.

2. Actus reus

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-84
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Type Question

This chapter provides an overview of actus reus, which refers to the ‘external elements’ of an offence. These external elements do not simply relate to D’s conduct. Rather, as we will see, the actus reus of an offence includes any offence elements outside of the fault element (‘mens rea’) of the offence. Before discussing the elements that form the actus reus, this chapter considers the distinction between actus reus and mens rea. It then describes the three elements of actus reus: conduct, circumstances, and results. It also explains the categories of actus reus offences, omissions liability, and causation before concluding with sections that outline potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with a brief summary of the main facts and judgment.

2. Actus reus

2019 ◽  
pp. 37-81
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Type Question

This chapter provides an overview of actus reus, which refers to the ‘external elements’ of an offence. An actus reus is not simply about the movements of the accused, that is, her conduct. Rather, it includes any offence requirement that is external from the mind of the accused: anything that is not mens rea. Before discussing the elements that form the actus reus, this chapter considers the distinction between actus reus and mens rea. It then describes the three elements of actus reus: conduct, circumstances, and results. It also explains the categories of actus reus offences, omissions liability, and causation before concluding with sections that outline potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with a brief summary of the main facts and judgment.

2. Actus reus

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Type Question

This chapter provides an overview of actus reus, which refers to the ‘external elements’ of an offence. An actus reus is not simply about the movements of the accused, that is, her conduct. Rather, it includes any offence requirement that is external from the mind of the accused: anything that is not mens rea. Before discussing the elements that form the actus reus, this chapter considers the distinction between actus reus and mens rea. It then describes the three elements of actus reus: conduct, circumstances, and results. It also explains the categories of actus reus offences, omissions liability, and causation before concluding with sections that outline potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with a brief summary of the main facts and judgment.

4. Interaction of actus reus and mens rea

2019 ◽  
pp. 127-145
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law

This chapter focuses on the interaction between actus reus and mens rea in proving criminal liability. It first considers how actus reus and mens rea relate to one another within the structure of an offence before discussing the issues that also emerge when applying offence requirements to a set of facts. As an example, it explains how every element (conduct, circumstance, and result) of an offence includes an actus reus requirement and a corresponding mens rea requirement. It also examines the correspondence principle and the doctrine of transferred malice, along with the coincidence principle. Finally, it outlines potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus and mens rea of an offence when applying the law in problem-type questions. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.

3. The elements of a crime: mens rea

2021 ◽  
pp. 88-135
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines the mens rea or mental fault of the accused. Because an actus reus is treated in law as a bad thing, an intention to cause it is, in law, a bad intention, a guilty mind. Similarly, consciously taking an unjustified risk of causing an actus reus—that is, recklessness—is also a bad state of mind. Unintentionally causing an actus reus by negligence may also be regarded as legally blameworthy. Each of these implies different degrees of ‘fault’. The chapter also discusses subjective and objective fault, intention in crimes other than murder, the distinction between motive and intention, subjective recklessness and malice, wilful blindness, suspicion and reasonable grounds to suspect, the correspondence principle and constructive crime, coincidence in time of actus reus and mens rea, ignorance of the law, absence of a ‘claim of right’ as an element in mens rea and proof of intention and foresight.

4. Interaction of actus reus and mens rea

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law

This chapter focuses on the interaction between actus reus and mens rea in proving criminal liability. It first considers how actus reus and mens rea relate to one another within the structure of an offence before discussing the issues that also emerge when applying offence requirements to a set of facts. As an example, it explains how every element (conduct, circumstance, and result) of an offence includes an actus reus requirement and a corresponding mens rea requirement. It also examines the correspondence principle and the doctrine of transferred malice, along with the coincidence principle. Finally, it outlines potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus and mens rea of an offence when applying the law in problem-type questions. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.

4. Interaction of actus reus and mens rea

2021 ◽  
pp. 130-149
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Reform ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problem Type ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law

This chapter focuses on the interaction between actus reus and mens rea in proving criminal liability. It first considers how actus reus and mens rea relate to one another within the structure of an offence before discussing the issues that also emerge when applying offence requirements to a set of facts. As an example, it explains how every element (conduct, circumstance, and result) of an offence includes an actus reus requirement and a potential corresponding mens rea requirement. It also examines the correspondence principle and the doctrine of transferred malice, along with the coincidence principle. Finally, it outlines potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus and mens rea of an offence when applying the law in problem-type questions. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.

3. The elements of a crime: mens rea

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines the mens rea or mental fault of the accused. Because an actus reus is treated in law as a bad thing, an intention to cause it is, in law, a bad intention, a guilty mind. Similarly, consciously taking an unjustified risk of causing an actus reus—that is, recklessness—is also a bad state of mind. Unintentionally causing an actus reus by negligence may also be regarded as legally blameworthy. Each of these implies different degrees of ‘fault’. The chapter also discusses subjective and objective fault, intention in crimes other than murder, the distinction between motive and intention, subjective recklessness and malice, wilful blindness, suspicion and reasonable grounds to suspect, the correspondence principle and constructive crime, coincidence in time of actus reus and mens rea, ignorance of the law, absence of a ‘claim of right’ as an element in mens rea and proof of intention and foresight.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document