Mens Rea (State of Mind) and Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct)

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-12
Author(s):  
Paul Connor
Keyword(s):  
Mens Rea ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Criminal Conduct

Crime as Prime

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Holton
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Attempted Murder ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Mental Element ◽  
Primitive Notion

This paper develops an account of core criminal terms like ‘murder’ that parallels Williamson’s account of knowledge. It is argued that while murder requires that the murderer killed, and that they did so with a certain state of mind, murder cannot be regarded as the conjunction of these two elements (the action, the actus reus, and the associated mental element, the mens rea). Rather, murder should be seen as a primitive notion, which entails each of them. This explains some of the problems around criminal attempt. Attempted murder cannot be seen simply as involving the state of mind of murder minus success; rather, it has to be seen as a self-standing offence, that of attempting to commit the murder.

2. The elements of a crime: actus reus

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-87
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problematic Case ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Mental Element ◽  
State Of Affairs

The chapter begins the exploration of the elements of criminal offences. Two factors are crucial: the event, behaviour or state of affairs known as the external element or actus reus, and the state of mind known as the mental element or mens rea. This chapter discusses the principle of actus reus, proof and the elements of the offence, how to identify elements of actus reus and mens rea, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea, the effect of penalty provisions in determining the elements of the actus reus, actus reus and justification or excuse, the problematic case of Dadson with regard to actus reus, physical involuntariness, a ‘state of affairs’ as an actus reus, general liability for omissions, offences of mere omission, causation, the ‘but for’ principle, the connection between fault and result and negligible causes.

2. The elements of a crime: actus reus

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Problematic Case ◽  
State Of Mind ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Mental Element ◽  
State Of Affairs

The chapter begins the exploration of the elements of criminal offences. Two factors are crucial: the event, behaviour or state of affairs known as the external element or actus reus, and the state of mind known as the mental element or mens rea. This chapter discusses the principle of actus reus, proof and the elements of the offence, how to identify elements of actus reus and mens rea, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea, the effect of penalty provisions in determining the elements of the actus reus, actus reus and justification or excuse, the problematic case of Dadson with regard to actus reus, physical involuntariness, a ‘state of affairs’ as an actus reus, general liability for omissions, offences of mere omission, causation, the ‘but for’ principle, the connection between fault and result, and negligible causes.

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.

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. 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.

Ashworth's Principles of Criminal Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Horder
Keyword(s):  
Small Business ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Business Activity ◽  
Financial Crimes ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Ninth Edition ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Conduct ◽  
Rules And Standards

Principles of Criminal Law takes a distinctly different approach to the study of criminal law, whilst still covering all of the vital topics found on criminal law courses. Uniquely theoretical, it seeks to elucidate the underlying principles and foundations of the criminal law, and aims to engage readers by analysing the law contextually. This ninth edition looks at issues such as the law’s history, criminal law values, alongside criminal conduct, actus reus, causation, and permissions; criminal capacity, mens rea, and fault, excusatory defences; homicide; non-fatal violations; property crimes; financial crimes; complicity; and inchoate offences. A special aim of the book is to bring an understanding of business activity-in particular small business activity-closer to the centre of the stage, in a discussion of the values protected by the criminal law, and of the way in which the law shapes its principles, rules, and standards. A large proportion of criminal offences are drafted with the conduct of businesses, as well as individuals, in mind.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document