...Unit 9 final project CJ 230-02 Criminal Law for Criminal Justice Prof. Sara Block July 15, 2013 First degree murder is a crime against a person. The actus rea is the “guilty act” of the murder, or killing itself. For first degree murder, you need to establish the mens rea, or “guilty mind”, which would be determine if the murder was premeditated or not. The mens rea, the act of a guilty mind. First degree murder is a premeditated crime. That init self is indicative of the mens rea of the perpetrator. The elements of mens rea are the act was done: purposely, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently. Elements of murder in Texas do not have to be pre-meditated to be first degree. You can be charged with murder 1. If you intentional or knowingly caused the death of someone it is first degree. 2. If you intended to cause serious bodily injury and commit an act that is dangerous to human life that causes death. 3. If you commit or attempt to commit a felony, and in the...
Words: 1526 - Pages: 7
...will be discussing in turn the actus reus and the mens rea, and the different factors that must be considered when trying to determine these elements of a crime. It is accurate in saying that two elements must be present, the actus reus and the mens rea when trying to determine whether someone is guilty of an offence, but you can not just take these words simply as they are. The actus reus can consist of more then just an act. In many circumstances, an omission can be just as serious, and it must be established at the very beginning whether it is an act or an omission you are dealing with. Causation must also be proved for the defendant to be liable for the consequences. The literal meaning of mens rea, 'a guilty mind' is also somewhat misleading. Other factors that are to be considered whilst discussing the above statement include the dynamics that constitute the necessary mens rea; whether the defendant had the intention of the consequences, and/or whether they acted recklessly (either Cunningham and Caldwell recklessness.) I will also be looking at strict liability cases, which is the one circumstance in which the defendant can be found guilty without the necessary mens rea. What ever the offence is at hand, the prosecution must establish every part of the actus reus, and it is crucial that these elements are strictly proved. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of the offence, they must have voluntarily brought about the actus reus. If the prosecution can not prove...
Words: 270 - Pages: 2
...Actus Reus The equation for Actus Reus is, Actus Reus, which is a guilty act and must be voluntary. Actus Reus is actually doing the acting, for example stabbing someone. The next part of the equation is plus Mens Rea, this means guilty mind, which means they had to of wanted to stab someone either by Intention, recklessness or malice aforethought. Strict liability can be here instead, this is where committing the offense alone is enough for you to be guilty, for example speeding, it doesn’t matter if you intended to you did it and that’s enough for you to be charged. Absence of defence is next and finally this all equals crime. Actus Reus + Mens Rea or Strict Liability + Absence of a defence = Crime There are four ways in which Actus Reus can be committed. The first is “Results crimes are those in which the actus Reus is defined in terms of prohibited consequences irrespective of how these are brought about.” This is where causation takes place and it is the actual consequences that are important where physical act links with consequences and results. The next for cases are example of causation. T R v Smith 1959, a fight broke out in a military barracks and a soldier was stabbed, on the way to the hospital he was dropped twice and the treatment at the hospital was inadequate, he later died, did he die because of the wound or the care he received. The stabbing was seen as the reason he died. R v Malcherek, a Defendant’s actions put him in the hospital and on life support...
Words: 1392 - Pages: 6
...Understanding the elements of a crime and the aims of sentencing Task 1:1: Actus reus In criminal law actus reus consists of all elements of crime aside from the defendants’ state of mind. Actus reus can consist of the following; Voluntary acts Because this is the physical action carried out by someone it is the most common type of actus reus e.g deliberately causing someone pain by hitting them. Because the criminal law is mainly affected with fault on the defendants part, it has to be an intentional (voluntary) act otherwise if the defendant has no control over his or her actions they have not correctly committed the actus reus. In Hill v Baxter [1958] the court gave examples of situations where a driver of a vehicle could not be said to be doing the act of driving voluntarily. These included a driver losing control of his vehicle by being stung by a swarm of bees, or of he was struck on the head by a stone or had a heart attack whilst driving. Involuntary Act Examples of involuntary acts include where the defendant hits another person because of a reflex action or a muscle spasm, another is where one person pushed a second person causing them to bump into a third person. In this situation the act of the second person who has been pushed is involuntary. Even though he has still hit the third person, he has not committed the Actus Reus for any assault offence. This applied in the case of Mitchell [1983] the defendant tried to push his way into a queue at the post office...
Words: 5108 - Pages: 21
...Name Kaplan University LS-100 Date Understanding Mens Rea, Actus Reus, and the basic elements of a crime The mental state, also called mens rea, refers to the guilty state of mind of the defendant. The thoughts and intentions of the defendant when the crime was committed effect the outcome of the case. The motive of the crime can determine if the prosecution seeks to try the defendant in criminal or civil court. Mens Rea has four states of mind: purposeful, knowing, reckless, and negligent. A purposeful act occurs when the defendant intends to commit a crime with an intended result. The defendant is fully aware of the possible outcome of his act and intends to achieve a specific result. For example: Jerry set fire to his ex-wife’s home with the intention of killing her. In his testimony to the police, Jerry admitted that he was completely aware of the result and acted with purpose. The state prosecuted Jerry in criminal court, where the judge convicted him of first-degree murder. A knowing act differs from a purposeful act in that the defendant intended to cause harm, knowing what the result would be, but did not act toward a specific individual. For example: Denise set off a bomb in a crowded, public place, without having a specific victim in mind. She knew the result of her crime could end with the death of at least one person, but she had no specific victim in mind when planting the bomb. A reckless act occurs when the defendant is careless...
Words: 749 - Pages: 3
...Classifying Crimes James Parkins CJ230: Criminal Law for Criminal Justice January 21, 2014 In this paper I will be covering many different things. I will be covering is some of the differences between both criminal and civil law. With that I will cover the goals and objectives, difference in remedies and outcomes, commencement of each case, and how the players in each system differ. After covering all of that I will give you a scenario and we will analyze it. Civil and Criminal Law Goals and Objectives The first thing that we will cove is the goals and objective of the criminal and civil laws. Civil laws are meant for one thing. That one thing is to protect an individual rather than the public interest. It works a lot with the constitutional rights of people. Criminal law is along the same lines with civil laws. The only difference is that criminal law is meant to protect the public and help maintain social order and stability. These are the objectives of the civil and criminal laws. Difference in remedies and outcomes As far as criminal law there are a multiple amount of possible outcomes. A list of possible is prison which could be state or federal, county jail, probation, etc. As far as the civil law goes, it is much different. Normally a majority of civil law outcomes are simply a monetary settlement (settlement involving money) or restraining orders. This explains the different possible outcomes of both criminal and civil law. Commencement of each case Now...
Words: 919 - Pages: 4
...What is Actus Reus? Actus Reus is the Latin word for the guilty or wrongful act. It is the physical element of the offence. The act or omission must be voluntary (deliberate). If the Defendant has no control of his actions the Actus Reus has not been committed. Actus Reus when proved beyond reasonable doubt in conjunction with Mens Rea ‘the guilty mind’ produces criminal liability. The Actus Reus of an offence is determined through sources, case law and statutes. The main elements of Actus Reus include: * Conduct * Voluntary Behaviour * Causation * Circumstances * Consequences * State of Affairs Conduct The accused must do something to commit an offence. The conduct itself might be criminal. For example taking money from another. The conduct of taking money from another represents the Actus Reus of theft. The Actus Reus of the crime is complete upon the conduct. Examples include: * Theft * Perjury * Using force to obtain property belonging to another * Rape * Possession of drugs Omissions (not doing something) A person cannot be liable for a failure to act unless the Defendant is under legal duty to take action. Duty to act arising from a contract – Pittwood [1902] When a person has a duty to act because of a duty arising from a contract, failure to perform the duty can make you criminally liable. The Defendant was employed by a railway company; he was a level crossing keeper. The Defendant negligently left the...
Words: 2546 - Pages: 11
...Supreme Court Case Happy Villa May 19, 2014 Loanan Ase In the case of Robert Tolan and Marian Tolan vs. Jeffrey Wayne Cotton, I will be discussing what interest me about this case. I will also deliberating on the liability and criminal liability of this case. The Tolan vs. Cotton case interests me because the United States have so many police that are brutalizing citizens. In some cases the police officers are getting away with it. After reading, reviewing, and studying this case I have learn a lot about the criminal system and laws that men and women should obey. I will explain how the nine judges on the Supreme courts all came to a verdict against the police officer Jeffrey Cotton after he shot an innocent suspect. This people will explain how a person technical error can cause such harm mentally, physically, and finically on a single family. Sources, Purposes, and Jurisdictions Robert and Marian Tolan are mother and son that is suing a former officer by the name of Jeffrey Wayne Cotton for using deadly force against an unarm innocent man. Cotton was indicted in May 2009. According to "Find Law" (2014), “Sergeant Cotton and Officer Edwards violated Robbie and Marian Tolan's right to freedom from excessive force (under Fourth Amendment, incorporated in Fourteenth); and both Officers acted in furtherance of a City of Bellaire official policy of racial profiling and discrimination.” The purpose of the Tolans taking their case to the Supreme Courts was “because no genuine...
Words: 792 - Pages: 4
...Unit 24 - Assignment 1 Introduction For this assignment I will be describing the elements of a crime which are Mens Rea and Actus Reus. Mens Rea is Latin for 'guilty mind' and it is the mental thinking behind the crime which has been committed, it refers to the intentions of the person who committed the crime. For example, when someone commits theft their intention is to permanently deprive the owner/s of the object. Actus Reus is Latin for 'guilty act' and it can either be an act or a failure to act. For example, when someone commits theft they must've physically taken something. The three C's of Actus Reus must be taken into account when investigating a crime they are: * Conduct - this is the act of damaging or destroying something/someone. * Circumstances - this is the fact that the property must belong to another. * Consent - this is the resulting damage or destruction of the act. Causation Causation, also known as result crimes is when a consequence has come about as a result of the Actus Reus being committed. When establishing causation the first step is to ask 'was the defendant's act a cause in the fact of the specified consequence?' This can be answered by asking 'But for what the defendant did would the consequence have occurred?' If the answer is YES then the result wouldn't have occurred if not for the defendant's acts and, therefore causation is established. A case which shows the chain of causation is the case of R v White (1910) the defendant...
Words: 3175 - Pages: 13
...the actus reus (the guilty act prohibited by law) that needs to be satisfied before a person can be convicted of an offence. This essay will consider how factual and legal causation can be established in regards to acts and omissions before discussing the views of Brett and Waller concerning the fairness of legal causation in situations such as refusing medical treatment and careless driving. For a person to be convicted for an offence the prosecution will establish firstly whether the person has committed the actus reus, secondly, the persons state of mind at the time of offence such as intent or recklessness (mens rea) and lastly whether the defendant has a valid defence such as self defence. To establish the actus reus of an offence the courts will consider the guilty act, the circumstances at the time of the act and the consequences of that act. These are commonly defined within statute relating to the particular offence, for example, the actus reus of criminal damage is defined in s.1(1) of Criminal Damage Act 1971 as “a person who, without lawful excuse destroys or damages property belonging to another”. Criminal damage requires a consequence from an action making it a result crime; therefore the prosecution would have to show that the defendants conduct had caused a consequence that is prohibited by criminal law, this is known as causation. Causation consists of two elements, factual and legal causation, both of which need to be established before the actus reus can...
Words: 1592 - Pages: 7
...committed an offence. * The conviction of threatening bodily injury carries a sentence of a 3 year probationary period. He also will be required to receive 18 months of counseling, via an Intensive Support and Supervision program. * History of attempted suicide * Described as depressed, lonely, and harboring sick tendencies * Unhealthy obsessions that put both him and the public at risk Actus Reus and Mens Rea * The Mens Rea began when the teenager, wrote and drew images of sexual sadism into his notebook (defecated faces, broken limbs, dead bodies) these images suggest the intent and knowledge to commit such an act * Mens Rea is also found throughout his personal webpage, and throughout the various smut websites the teen visited. * The Actus Reus of threatening bodily injury happened when the teen went to Facebook and issued “threats” to a female through sexual and violently sadistic fantasies and images. The crown can also say that sending the female to a link to his website, which included violent decapitations to women could be form of Actus Reus The Defense’s Argument The defense charged with representing the 18 year old sadist has claimed, his words and ideas were mainly that. The...
Words: 506 - Pages: 3
...Criminal Law Jordan Miller CJA 354 September 24, 2012 Kristin Mildenberger Criminal Law Former Chief Justice and President of the United States from 1909 to 1913, William Howard Taft once stated “Presidents come and go, but the Supreme Court goes on forever.” That statement currently remains to hold true. The first Supreme Court was called to assemble on February 1, 1790, at which time the powers and duties of the Supreme Court were established. The United States Supreme Court currently has one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices and is the highest judicial body in the United States. In the 2009 case of the Supreme Court vs. Joel Tenenbaum, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued former Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum for file sharing 30 songs he illegally downloaded from the Internet. According to Bloomberg (2012): The court, without comment, refused to hear Tenenbaums challenge to a law that let the recording industry collect thousands of dollars from individuals for such downloading. The jury was told to impose damages, set by US copyright law, of between $750 and $150,000 per violation. Jurors set a rate of $22,500 for each of 30 songs he downloaded. (para. 2) A jury subsequently ordered Tenenbaum to pay $675,000 in fines directly associated with each of the 30 illegally downloaded and shared songs. "I find it hard to believe that the legal system would uphold a six-figure sum against someone just for downloading music," Tenenbaum...
Words: 1350 - Pages: 6
...Question 1- George Hewkin For Lucy, Jon would be liable for s.47. To find liability we must first establish the actus reus. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The assault refers to common assault so either assault or battery. In this case it’s an assault. Jon made Lucy fear immediate and unlawful (Lamb) violence. There is no need for any physical contact. The cases of Ireland and Burstow confirm that silence can amount to an assault. It’s also clear she feared unlawful violence (Logdon) as she ran off crying. The second part of the definition is occasioning, did Jon’s actions cause the harm. There are no intervening acts so its clear his actions where the operating and substantial cause. The final part of the actus reus Is the harm caused by Jon’s battery actual bodily harm. Miller defines ABH as ‘more than minimal harm’. Chan-fook established mental harm as a form of ABH. As she couldn’t go out for months after, I believe this is more than minimal harm. Actus reus established. Next the mens rea must be proven. Intention or recklessness as to causing the initial assault or battery. Savage confirms the mens rea for s.47. In this case I believe Jon had intention, it was a clear action that’s not a natural reflex or anything of that nature. It’s completely voluntary therefore it was his choice to carry it out. Liability can be established, Jon would be charged with s.47, which carries a sentence of up to 5 years imprisonment. For Malik, Jon would be liable for battery...
Words: 742 - Pages: 3
...Abel, Barbara and Cindy to be criminally liable by virtue of section 1(1) Theft Act 1968 it must be proved that they had “dishonestly appropriated property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it”. Property Belonging to Another - The property in question is the metal fence panels which belong to the Local Authority. The fence panels could be construed as forming part of the “land” as the fence was attached to land and was severed from it. Pursuant to s.4(2)(b) of the Theft Act 1968 Abel, Barbara and Cindy can be held to have stolen this “land” as he actually caused the panels to be severed by the use of hacksaws and appropriated the panels. Appropriation – s.3 Theft Act 1968 – this is the actus reus element of the crime. Abel, Barbara and Cindy have clearly appropriated the panels as only the Local Authority, as owners of the panels, have the right to cut through the metal panels and later sell them for scrap. Dishonesty – s.2 Theft Act 1968 – this is the mens rea element of the crime; the mental intent to intentionally deprive the other of it. Abel = We are informed that Abel planned to go to the playground in the middle of the night after reading about the new project. His intention was to go there and take the fence panels and posts and sell them on as scrap metal. He recruited the help of his daughters and told them to keep quiet if questions are asked. It appears that Abel does not fall within the exceptions contained...
Words: 2687 - Pages: 11
...Unit 24 - Assignment 1 Introduction For this assignment I will be describing the elements of a crime which are Mens Rea and Actus Reus. Mens Rea is Latin for 'guilty mind' and it is the mental thinking behind the crime which has been committed, it refers to the intentions of the person who committed the crime. For example, when someone commits theft their intention is to permanently deprive the owner/s of the object. Actus Reus is Latin for 'guilty act' and it can either be an act or a failure to act. For example, when someone commits theft they must've physically taken something. The three C's of Actus Reus must be taken into account when investigating a crime they are: • Conduct - this is the act of damaging or destroying something/someone. • Circumstances - this is the fact that the property must belong to another. • Consent - this is the resulting damage or destruction of the act. Causation Causation, also known as result crimes is when a consequence has come about as a result of the Actus Reus being committed. When establishing causation the first step is to ask 'was the defendant's act a cause in the fact of the specified consequence?' This can be answered by asking 'But for what the defendant did would the consequence have occurred?' If the answer is YES then the result wouldn't have occurred if not for the defendant's acts and, therefore causation is established. A case which shows the chain of causation is the case of R v White (1910) the defendant put cyanide...
Words: 3175 - Pages: 13
