mens rea
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

663
(FIVE YEARS 192)

H-INDEX

10
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Illia ◽  
Elanor Colleoni ◽  
Kiron Ranvidran ◽  
Nuccio Ludovico

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
Paul Connor ◽  
Glenn Hutton ◽  
David Johnston ◽  
Elliot Gold
Keyword(s):  
Mens Rea ◽  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Cameron James Laing

<p>The Harmful Digital Communications Bill has recently been reported back from the Justice and Electoral Select Committee. The Bill seeks to deter, prevent and mitigate the harm caused to individuals through digital communications and to provide victims of harmful digital communications with a quick and efficient means of redress. In addition to modernising existing legislation and establishing a new civil enforcement regime, the Bill controversially introduces a new criminal offence of posting a harmful communication with the intent that the communication causes harm to a victim. Surprisingly, the offence differs significantly from comparable legislation abroad where neither a mens rea standard of intent is present nor a requirement that a victim must suffer serious emotional distress in order for an offender to be liable. This paper critiques the likely application of the offence and ultimately concludes that in light of differing legislation abroad and cases which have arisen since the enactment of the Communications Act in the United Kingdom, that the mens rea standard should be modified to include subjective recklessness, and the requirement that an intended victim must suffer actual harm should be removed.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Cameron James Laing

<p>The Harmful Digital Communications Bill has recently been reported back from the Justice and Electoral Select Committee. The Bill seeks to deter, prevent and mitigate the harm caused to individuals through digital communications and to provide victims of harmful digital communications with a quick and efficient means of redress. In addition to modernising existing legislation and establishing a new civil enforcement regime, the Bill controversially introduces a new criminal offence of posting a harmful communication with the intent that the communication causes harm to a victim. Surprisingly, the offence differs significantly from comparable legislation abroad where neither a mens rea standard of intent is present nor a requirement that a victim must suffer serious emotional distress in order for an offender to be liable. This paper critiques the likely application of the offence and ultimately concludes that in light of differing legislation abroad and cases which have arisen since the enactment of the Communications Act in the United Kingdom, that the mens rea standard should be modified to include subjective recklessness, and the requirement that an intended victim must suffer actual harm should be removed.</p>


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-359
Author(s):  
Clara Juul Holm
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  

Abstract:This article examines some conceptual challenges associated with the content and possible demarcation of the notions of consent and voluntariness in recent Danish legislation on rape. It is argued that free will or voluntariness, and the expression thereof, should be seen as occurrences on a spectrum, and that the expression of consent or free will is at least partially necessary if such subjective concepts are to be useful in a legal context. The paper examines some general implications of this for possible  outcomes of case law. Uncertainties include what should be made of the use of the »presumptions« mentioned in the bill. Some implications for the evaluation of a defendant’s mens rea are also touched upon. It is concluded that the Danish court enjoys a margin of discretion that allows it the ability to criminalise instances of intercourse even when they are not necessarily non-voluntary.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-40
Author(s):  
Mitchelle Kang'Ethe

A person may be insane while committing an unlawful act, leading them to raise the defence of insanity in court. This defence argues that the person’s illness prevented them from having the criminal intent needed to satisfy the mens rea requirement for criminal responsibility. The successful establishment of this defence in Kenya leads to the court issuing a special verdict of ‘guilty but insane’ (GBI). This verdict sees that the defendant is incarcerated in a place of safe custody where they can be treated for the illness that contributed to their commission of the offence. While isolation and treatment of the defendant form the primary aims of the verdict, this paper demonstrates that they are barely achieved in Kenya. This is because the conditions crucial to the verdict’s implementation–medication and therapy, a place of custody and the presence of psychiatrists–are wanting in the country. After examining the institutional barriers to the realisation of the verdict’s objectives, the paper studies various responses to these challenges by Kenya and Ghana. It finds solutions that promote the realisation of the verdict’s aims such as the provision of educational opportunities in forensic psychiatry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document