Law - Mens Rea
- Created by: kirsten1998
- Created on: 20-09-15 14:41
Other questions in this quiz
2. DPP v Smith was criticised by the Law Commission as -
- D had no intention
- looking at it from a reasonable man's POV ignores what the D see's
- D could not have foreseen what would have happened
- looking at it from the D's POV ignores what a reasonable man would have seen
3. 'It is necessary for the judge to direct the jury that they may only find an I to kill or do serious bodily harm if they are satisfied that: - Death or serious bodily harm was a v.c - D appreciated that death or serious bodily harm was a v.c
- Lord Steyn
- Lord Mance
- Lord Denning
4. The CJA 1967 s.8 - 2 things were made clear in this:
- Intention in criminal cases should be assessed subjectively (the jury must decide what the actual D I or foresaw). AND. If D can foresee the consequence, this is only evidence that D I the consequence, it does not mean he I the consequence.
- Recklessness in criminal cases should be assessed subjectively (the jury must decide what the actual D I or foresaw). AND. If D cannot foresee the consequence, this is only evidence that D I the consequence, it does not mean he I the consequence.
5. D was driving his car, was ordered to stop by a policeman. He failed to do this so the policeman jumped on the bonnet of his car, D swerves and sped off to avoid the policeman, he was thrown off and killed.
- Nedrick 1986
- Woollin 1998
- DPP v Smith 1961
- R v Matthews & Alleyne 2003
Comments
No comments have yet been made