Criminal Law Lecture Notes

Introduction

• Transition from actus reus (guilty act) to mens rea (guilty mind) in criminal liability.
• Focus will be on:
  • Intention
  • Recklessness
  • Negligence
  • Strict liability

Mens Rea Overview

• Mens rea often defined as the "guilty mind" or the "mental element" of an offense.
• The prosecution must prove mens rea to establish criminal liability.
• Mens rea can be manifested as:
  • Intention: Not necessarily an intention to commit a crime, but to bring about certain circumstances.
  • Recklessness: Involves taking an unjustified risk.

Proving Mens Rea

• Direct evidence of a defendant's mental state is rare.
• Intent is often inferred from circumstantial evidence.
• Section 8 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 allows inferences from all evidence, not just natural consequences.

Criminal Intent

• General understanding: Crimes typically require intent, but what does "intent" mean?
• Case Examples:
  • Crown and Maloney (1985): Clarified that foresight is not sufficient for murder; intent must involve purpose.
  • R v. Woollin (1999): Differentiated intent from recklessness; introduced questions for juries on intention.

Recklessness

• Defined as taking an unjustified risk with awareness.
• Case Examples:
  • Crown and Cunningham (1957): Malicious intent aligned with recklessness.
  • Crown and Caldwell (1982): Introduced objective recklessness; overturned by R v G and Another (2003) which clarified recklessness involves awareness of risk.

Transferred Malice

• Applicable when the mens rea is directed at one person but affects another.
• Case Examples:
  • Crown and Latimer (1986): Malice can be transferred from intended to actual victim.
  • R v Gnango (2011): Extended liability to include aiding and abetting in transferred malice cases.

Strict Liability

• In strict liability offenses, mens rea is not required alongside actus reus for conviction.
• Predominantly statutory offenses; often regulatory or minor offenses.
• Determination:
  • Start with presumption of mens rea.
  • Displacement of mens rea possible if it supports statutory objectives and promotes vigilance.
• Case Example:
  • Gamon v. Attorney General of Hong Kong (1985): Established guidelines for strict liability offenses, presumption of mens rea, and conditions for its displacement.

Conclusion

• Understanding when and how mens rea applies is critical to analyzing criminal liability.
• Future topics will explore participation in criminal activity and more on strict liability offenses.