Law - Mens Rea

Law - Mens Rea

1. The mental element of an offence. It is the 'guilty mind'. Each offence has its own mens rea to be guilty. It must be proved that D had the relevant mens rea.

2. There are different levels of mens rea so the law can identify the degree to which a person is at fault for their actions. D must have at least the minimum mens rea for the offence to be found guilty.

3. The courts have developed definitions of common states of mind found in criminal liability.

4. Recklessness

   • D will have acted recklessly where he knows there's a risk of the result happening, but takes the risk.
     • CUNNINGHAM: D tore a gas meter from the wall of an empty house in order to steal the money in it. This caused gas to seep into the house next door, making V ill. D was not liable as he didn't know there was a risk of gas escaping into V's house. He had not intended to cause the harm, nor had he taken a risk he knew about.

5. Indirect Intent

   • A court may find that D indirectly intends a result where that result is not desired but is virtually certain to occur.
     • WOOLIN: D intended to throw the crying baby into the pram to make the baby be quiet. He missed and the baby died. Convicted of manslaughter not murder as he didnt think the baby would be seriously injured.

6. Direct intent

   • D directly intends a result where it is his aim or purpose. D desires the result and sets out to achieve it.
     • As set out in the case of MOHAN