mens rea cases Criminal Law G153
Quiz yourself by thinking what should be in
each of the black spaces below before clicking
on it to display the answer.
Help!
|
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mohan (1975) | (mens rea) Intention is 'a decision to bring about the prohibited consequence'. Motive not relevant
🗑
|
||||
| Calhaem | (direct intent) Majority of criminal cases have direct intent. D intends to bring about prohibited consequence. AO2 is this just common sense?
🗑
|
||||
| Moloney | (oblique intent) D shot and killed stepfather in a drunken game HOL: foresight of consequences is not intention itself. It is only evidence of intention. Failed to correctly apply s.8 CJA 1967
🗑
|
||||
| Hancock & Shankland | (oblique intent) Miners prevent another going to work, taxi driver was killed COA/HOL quashed convictions.
🗑
|
||||
| Moloney | guidelines are unsafe failed to use the s.8 word "probable"
🗑
|
||||
| Nedrick | (oblique intent) D poured paraffin through V's letterbox, child in house died in fire COA: Jury 'infer' intention if: Consequence is a virtual certainty & D realised this (how probable was consequence & did D forsee it?)
🗑
|
||||
| Woollin (1998) | (oblique intent) Father threw 3month old baby at pram which killed baby HOL: Consequence (e.g. death or serious bodily harm) must be a virtual certainty & D realised this. Jury 'find' intention
🗑
|
||||
| Re A (conjoined twins) (2000) | (oblique intent) Docs wanted to operate on conjoined twins but knew this would kill weaker twin COA thought Woolin meant foresight of consequences IS intention
🗑
|
||||
| Matthews and Alleyne (2003) | (oblique intent) D's dropped V from bridge into river knowing he could not swim - he died COA: Foresight of consequences and virtual certainty of death/serious bodily harm is not intention in itself, just evidence of intent
🗑
|
||||
| s.8 Criminal Justice Act 1967 | A court/jury can infer intention where D foresaw result of his actions as natural and probable consequence This is a subjective test that makes clear foresight of consequences is only part of evidence for intention
🗑
|
||||
| Cunningham (1957) (recklessness) | D tore gas meter seeped into house next door affecting woman inside. Subjective test for recklessness. D must realise there is a risk of the consequences occuring and decide to take risk
🗑
|
||||
| Lidar (2000) | (recklessness) Doorman dragged from car by D driving off - V died of injuries. Can be guilty of involuntary manslaughter if reckless. D must have forseen high probable risk of serious injury or death. AO2 Adomako is this still law?
🗑
|
||||
| MPC v Caldwell (1981) | (recklessness) D got drunk and set fire to a hotel - convicted of arson HOL: Introduced objective test where 1) D realises risk and 2) D has not thought about the possibility of risk
🗑
|
||||
| G & another (2003) | (recklessness) 2 young boys set fire to newspapers outside shop thinking would go out, caused £1m damage HOL quashed conviction. Overruled Caldwell. D must be aware of the risk- subjective test (approved draft Criminal Code test)
🗑
|
||||
| Draft Criminal Code 1989 | D acts recklessly when he (1) is aware of a risk (2) knows it is unreasonable to take risk
🗑
|
||||
| Adomako | Doctor in surgery Gross negligence manslaughter
🗑
|
||||
| Sweet v Parsley | (mens rea, knowledge) Woman rented out farmhouse - did not know her tenants were smoking cannabis there. HOL: Knowledge- knowledge is required for D to be guilty
🗑
|
||||
| Latimer | (mens rea, transferred malice) D aimed a belt at a man in pub but belt struck woman instead - assault Transferred malice - D is guilty if he intended a similar crime but on a different victim
🗑
|
||||
| Thabo Meli | (mens rea, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea) D attacked man and threw over cliff - V died of exposure Ds guilty as actus reus and mens rea were combined in a series of acts
🗑
|
||||
| Fagan v MPC | (mens rea, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea) D drove on policeman's foot refused to move car initially COA: actus reus was still continuing so was present with mens rea together
🗑
|
Review the information in the table. When you are ready to quiz yourself you can hide individual columns or the entire table. Then you can click on the empty cells to reveal the answer. Try to recall what will be displayed before clicking the empty cell.
To hide a column, click on the column name.
To hide the entire table, click on the "Hide All" button.
You may also shuffle the rows of the table by clicking on the "Shuffle" button.
Or sort by any of the columns using the down arrow next to any column heading.
If you know all the data on any row, you can temporarily remove it by tapping the trash can to the right of the row.
To hide a column, click on the column name.
To hide the entire table, click on the "Hide All" button.
You may also shuffle the rows of the table by clicking on the "Shuffle" button.
Or sort by any of the columns using the down arrow next to any column heading.
If you know all the data on any row, you can temporarily remove it by tapping the trash can to the right of the row.
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Created by:
Rich Whitaker
Popular Law sets