Gabrelle D. Cummings Form L6A Law Essay October 29, 2014
“The Mens Rea of intention is highly confusing and neither parliament nor the courts have been able to clarify the ambiguities”~ critically discuss this statement.
The mens rea is the Latin for the guilty mind and refers to the state of mind of the accused at the time the actus reus is committed. Intention is a subjective concept; what the defendant was actually thinking at the time the offence was being committed as opposed to what a reasonable person would be thinking had they been in the same position. Intention can be classified as one of the highest forms of mens rea. There are different types of intention; they are ulterior intent, direct intent, oblique intent, specific intent and basic intent. It is always confusing decision making since there is no statute giving meaning to them especially with so many types of intent there isn’t really much difference between them and no specific way of differentiating between them, the decision is often the juror’s to decide which seems best such as the case R v. Moloney . This shows that neither the courts nor Parliament created definitions for the mens rea of intent. Though they are so similar they have very slight ways of knowing little differences. For instance the ulterior intent is when a person ends up in a difference offence which he did not intend to do, for example R v. Nedrick  when the defendant put a petrol bomb in the mail box coincidentally burning the house with a child inside. The defendant wanted to frighten the owner of the house but ended up with a murder charge instead. But this can also lead us to Specific intent. How? Specific intent is applied to certain offences such as rape, murder and anything with the punishment of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document