scholarly journals The Relativistic Theory of Coincidence between Mens Rea and Actus Reus in Islamic and English Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (10) ◽  
pp. 492-508
Author(s):  
 Ali Saffary ◽  
Razieh Saberi
Keyword(s):  
Relativistic Theory ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
English Law

26. Handling and related offences

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Money Laundering ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Proceeds Of Crime ◽  
English Law ◽  
Do So ◽  
Stolen Goods

This chapter deals with handling of stolen goods and related offences. Under s 22 of the Theft Act 1968, a person who dishonestly receives goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realization by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so knowing or believing that they are stolen goods, is guilty of the offence of handling stolen goods. English law treats this offence as an independent crime rather than one of being an ‘accessory after the fact’ to theft. The chapter considers the actus reus and mens rea of handling stolen goods, when goods cease to be stolen, handling by omission, the ‘doctrine’ of recent possession, dishonest retention of a wrongful credit, advertising for the return of stolen goods and money laundering. It concludes with an overview of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Murder in the Criminal Law of Iran and Islam

2004 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-169
Author(s):  
Ebrahim Ghodsi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Will ◽  
English Law ◽  
Key Aspects

Wilful murder, the deliberate killing of another human being, is considered a crime in the criminal law of Iran and Islam, and the consequential penalty invoked is retaliation. The offence, as in English law, requires proof of both actus reus (external element) and mens rea (fault element). The statutory offence may be found in Articles 14 and 204–268 of the 1991 version of the Islamic Penal Code and in Articles 612–615 of 1996 Code. In Islam there are many verses and precedents (of the Prophet and the Shiite Imams) condemning the crime of murder as illegal and retaliation as the appropriate punishment for this crime provided the legal elements are established. The requisite elements of the offence have been subjected to varied review in Iran and Islam. The focus of this article is to study the key ingredients in more depth. Retaliation as a punishment has three key aspects: it is personal; it should be equal with the crime; and to be performed according to the will and option of the avengers of blood.

26. Handling and related offences

2021 ◽  
pp. 1070-1095
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Money Laundering ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
English Law ◽  
Do So ◽  
Stolen Goods

This chapter deals with handling of stolen goods and related offences. Under s 22 of the Theft Act 1968, a person who dishonestly receives goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realization by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so knowing or believing that they are stolen goods, is guilty of the offence of handling stolen goods. English law treats this offence as an independent crime rather than one of being an ‘accessory after the fact’ to theft. The chapter considers the actus reus and mens rea of handling stolen goods, when goods cease to be stolen, handling by omission, the ‘doctrine’ of recent possession, dishonest retention of a wrongful credit, advertising for the return of stolen goods and money laundering.

Mens Rea in Manslaughter

1962 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-212
Author(s):  
C. C. Turpin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Student Teacher ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Mental Element ◽  
English Law

That the much agitated question of mens rea in manslaughter should again be essayed may require some justification. Such is readily found in the deplorable circumstance that this major crime remains obscure and controversial in its most important aspect. Decisions may be found to support any of a variety of views about the presence, absence or nature of the mental element in manslaughter; textbooks on criminal law differ widely on the question; and student, teacher, practitioner, and doubtless also sometimes judge, are left in bewilderment by the abundance and variety of dicta, argument and opinion on the subject. This may seem good reason for not adding another view, but the writer is persuaded that, upon the basis of much valuable inquiry carried out in recent years by a number of workers in the field, it is now possible to state in reasonably clear and confident terms what is that element which, together with the actus reus of killing, constitutes the crime of manslaughter in English law. The writer would begin by acknowledging his indebtedness in particular to various writings of Dr. Turner, Dr. Glanville Williams and Professor Hart. They are not to blame for what follows; but whatever illumination this article may shed is the result of his study of their work.Encouragement to write this article was derived from the following passage in Russell on Crime:“It is … incumbent upon writers, especially in matters of general principle, whenever there appears to be a lack of precision in the authorities, to make concrete suggestions for the removal of doubts and difficulties.

Murder in the Criminal Law of Iran and Islam

1995 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-169
Author(s):  
Ebrahim Ghodsi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Will ◽  
English Law ◽  
Key Aspects

Wilful murder, the deliberate killing of another human being, is considered a crime in the criminal law of Iran and Islam, and the consequential penalty invoked is retaliation. The offence, as in English law, requires proof of both actus reus (external element) and mens rea (fault element). The statutory offence may be found in Articles 14 and 204–268 of the 1991 version of the Islamic Penal Code and in Articles 612–615 of 1996 Code. In Islam there are many verses and precedents (of the Prophet and the Shiite Imams) condemning the crime of murder as illegal and retaliation as the appropriate punishment for this crime provided the legal elements are established. The requisite elements of the offence have been subjected to varied review in Iran and Islam. The focus of this article is to study the key ingredients in more depth. Retaliation as a punishment has three key aspects: It is personal; it should be equal with the crime; and to be performed according to the will and option of the avengers of blood.

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.

scholarly journals Recognising the Role of the Emotion of Fear in Offences and Defences

2019 ◽  
Vol 83 (6) ◽  
pp. 450-472
Author(s):  
Susan SM Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Loss Of Self ◽  
Human Conduct ◽  
Privileged Status ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Male Experience

Anger, its part in human conduct and in crime commission has been much discussed and accorded a privileged status within the law, while the role of fear has been less considered. Notwithstanding, fear and related emotional states have received some recognition as intrinsic elements of the perpetrator’s object integral to the actus reus of certain offences and relevant to the defendant’s mens rea of some defences. The harm caused by deliberately or negligently instilling fear in another is inconsistently considered in law as is its impact on criminal responsibility and mens rea. Fear has been recently acknowledged as a permissible cause of loss of self-control in a partial defence to murder (Coroners and Justice Act 2009 s 55(3)). It remains a contested emotion and as with anger the male experience of what circumstances trigger fear predominates.

scholarly journals ASAS PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN TERHADAP KORPORASI YANG MELAKUKAN TINDAK PIDANA PERBANKAN

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Nurul Sasmita
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Sense Of Justice

The aims of this thesis is (1) to investigate andexplain the positions of corporations in conducting banking criminalacts, and (2) also to identify and explain the criminal responsibility ofbank as the perpetrator in banking criminal acts. This research isnormative, conceptual approach and the approach of legislationregarding responsibility principles of the corporation for banking criminalacts.Corporations have chances in committing a crime, especially bankingcriminal acts just by making a corporation recognized as a subject ofexistence apart from human beings, so that in practice there is a criminal offense committed by the corporation. The corporation takespart in the occurrence of a crime. In practice, the determination of acriminal offenseconducted by the corporation is known through two things: first, the works of the committee: they should be constructed as theyuse the principles of the liability of corporation’s criminal actions. Principally, stakeholders and officials or employees of a corporationhave the responsibility for its owncorporate actions; second, errors in the corporation,as long as it is in the science of criminal law, the overview of criminals is still oftenassociated with physical actions performed by the manufacturers(fysieke dader) but this can be overcome by the study of  "functionalactors" (functioneledader). We can prove that the action of committeeor employees of the corporation in the society act traffic concerned,the acts of the corporationerrors in the forms (dolus or culpa) must be regarded ascorporate faults.Towards the corporations that make banking criminal acts we canhave their responsibility with the principles of strict liability. Onthe principle of strict liability, it is known that the responsibility ison them even if they do not have the required mens rea. The substanceof this principle is that the perpetrator has been punished if theperpetrator may have provable conduct prohibited by the criminalprovision (actus reus) withoutsee the inner attitude. In this conception, the corporation is consideredhaving responsibility forphysical acts performed by management. A corporation convicted in principles isintended to develop a sense of justice in the corporation who commitsbanking criminal acts as stated in Article 46 paragraph (2), sothat if a corporation committed criminal acts, we can also have theresponsibility of the corporation. Keywords:Banking Criminal Acts, Corporation, ResponsibilityMenurut peraturan perundang-udangan, korporasi sebagai subyek hukum dapat dikenakan pidana sebagaimana manusia melakuka tindak pidana. Pada praktiknya, penentuan tindak pidana yang dilakukan oleh korporasi diketahui melalui dua hal, yaitu pertama tentang perbuatan pengurus yang harus dikonstruksikan sebagai perbuatan korporasimaka digunakanlah asas pertanggungjawaban pidana. Pada asas tersebut stakeholder maupun pengurus atau pegawai suatu korporasi, bertanggungjawab terhadap perbuatan korporasi itu sendiri. dan kedua tentang kesalahan pada korporasi, memang selama ini dalam ilmu hukum pidana gambaran tentang pelaku tindak pidana masih sering dikaitkan dengan perbuatan yang secara fisik dilakukan oleh pembuat (fysieke dader) namun hal ini dapat diatasi dengan ajaran “pelaku fungsional” (functionele dader). Kita dapat membuktikan bahwa perbuatan pengurus atau pegawai korporasi itu dalam lalu lintas bermasyarakat berlaku sebagai perbuatan korporasi yang bersangkutan maka kesalahan dalam bentuk (dolus atau culpa) mereka harus dianggap sebagai kesalahan korporasi. Terhadap korporasi yang melakukan tindak pidana perbankan dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pidana dengan menggunakan asas strict liability.Pada asas strict liability diketahui bahwa pembebanan tanggung jawab pidana kepada pelakunya sekalipun pelakunya tidak memiliki mens rea yang dipersyaratkan. Adapun substansi dari asas ini adalah pelaku sudah dapat dijatuhi pidana apabila pelaku telah dapat dibuktikan melakukan perbuatan yang dilarang oleh ketentuan pidana (actus reus) tanpa melihat sikap batinnya. Dalam konsepsi ini, korporasi dianggap bertanggung jawab atas perbuatan yang secara fisik dilakukan oleh pengurus (direksi dan komisaris). Dipidananya korporasi pada asas ini dimaksudkan dapat menimbulkan rasa keadilan pada korporasi yang melakukan tindak pidana perbankan, sehingga apabila korporasi melakukan tindak pidana maka korporasi juga dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban.Kata kunci: Korporasi, Pertanggungjawaban, Tindak Pidana Perbankan

scholarly journals Inchoate aspects of Attempted Crimes: Revisiting Criminal Law for its effective Management

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2S7) ◽  
pp. 391-395
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Element Approach

Actus Reus is known as the external element of the objective component of Criminal Law. Mens Rea, the guilty intention, determines the criminal responsibility. Mens Rea and Actus Reus both are the components of a criminal activity that determines the liability of the accused person. An action carried out in furtherance of criminal activity doesn’t become an attempted crime unless it is confirmed by the illegality for which it was conducted. An attempted crime is an action that reveals the illegal intention on its face. The aspects of a crime such as the Mens Rea, Actus Reus, intentional crime, unintentional act caused as a result of carelessness, motivates to indulge in violating the provisions of law. The four theories of law such as the rule of proximity, the test of unequivocally, the indispensable element approach and the test of social danger are the elements of a crime.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document