Mens Rea

• Mens Rea = guilty mind
• Mens rea is the mental element of offence and is for prosecution to prove that the defendant had the correct level of mens rea at the time of offence.
• Four Levels of Mens Rea:

  1. Intention (highest level)
  2. Recklessness
  3. Negligence
  4. Knowledge (lowest level)
• Mens rea has subjective and objective elements
• Subjective = what the defendant personally thinks/ intends/ believes
• Objective = What the reasonable, average member of society would think or know
• INTENTION:

  Mohan (1975) - "A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused's power, (the prohibited consequence), no matter whether the accused desired that consequence or not".

  Motive = irrelevant and different from intention
• INTENTION:

  s.8 Criminal Justice Act 1967 = (summarized) jury can infer intention from a defendants actions and all of the evidence brought together - not just foresight of consequences.
• INTENTION:

  2 types:

  1. Direct Intention = defendant already and the intention to make a specific outcome and makes it happen.
  2. Oblique Intention = they are aware of what's happening and aware some other consequence may happen. Don't especially desire additional consequence, are aware its virtually certain
• Oblique Intention:

  R v Nedrick (1986) = D poured petrol through letterbox of women he didn't like. Lit fire to it and child died in fire. He claimed he hasn't seen the death as a probable outcome.

  R v Woollin (1999) = D became overwhelmed with his baby's crying and choking and in his frustration threw 3 month old towards his prams. Missed the pram, baby hitting the wall then the floor. Impact killed baby.
• RECKLESSNESS:

  where defendant knows there is a risk of consequence happening but takes risk anyway (R v G and R)
• RECKLESSNESS:

  R v Cunningham (1975) = D ripped gas meter off wall to steal money inside. Did not realize gas would seep out of meter. It did, poisoning his mother in law who was asleep in flat next door. NOT GUILTY

  R v G and R (2003) = D aged 11 and 12 set fire to some newspapers near wheelie bin behind Co-Op shop. Left without putting out the fire, causing over £1 million damage. NOT GUILTY
• RECKLESSNESS:

  If offence has "recklessness" as Mens Rea, Defendant is still guilty if they have actual intention to do crime. Because Intention is higher form of Mens Rea than Recklessness. Mens Rea requirements for crime show the minimum that is at least required.
• NEGLIGENCE:

  person becomes negligent when they fail to meet standards of reasonable man. Makes it an objective test.

  D will be guilty because he didn't act as reasonable man would have done in circumstances.

  What D intends or thinks = irrelevant

  makes it much lower level of fault than intention or recklessness and is similar to being careless in your actions
• NEGLIGENCE: (examples)

  s.3 Road Traffic Act 1988 = makes it an offence to drive negligently - without due care and attention

  DPP v Adomako (1994) = only offence you will study where negligence is relevant is gross negligence manslaughter, is when someone dies due to serious carelessness of D