What is the general principle for there to be criminal liability?
The AR and MR needs to coincide in time.
1 of 11
What is basic intent?
MR doesn't go beyond AR e.g criminal damage. Offences of basic intent can be committed recklessly. D can't use vol intox as defence (Majewski)
2 of 11
What is specific intent?
An offence which can only be committed intentionally. e.g murder/theft, can rely on vol intox as defence.
3 of 11
What is ulterior intent?
MR required goes beyond AR of offence. e.g Agg criminal damage.
4 of 11
What is strict liability?
Offences where it's not necessary to prove MR or negligence in respect of one or more elements of AR. (s4 RTA driving when drunk)
5 of 11
What did Sweet v Parsley establish?
If the statute is silent, there is apresumption in favour of MR, court will look at other sections of relevant statute,social context,maximum sentence.
6 of 11
What is the rule regarding capacity?
A person should only be held criminally liable where he has capacity to understand his actions.
7 of 11
What does the Children and Young Persons Act say about capacity?
A child under 10 is incapable of crime and can't be convicted of a criminal offence.
8 of 11
What is the defence of insanity?
A d who successfully raises the defence must be acquitted on the grounds that he is not guilty by reason of insanity. (Murder - indefinite discretion)
9 of 11
What is the defence of intoxication?
Not a defence but may be raised by d charged with an offence of specific intent where he claims he didn't have necessary MR to commit offence,even when vol intox.
10 of 11
What is the defence of duress?
An accussed admits committing AR of offence with MR but maintains that he only did so as a result of threats to inflict serious harm on himself or his family. R v Graham. Has to be death or serious injury, not about capacity but an excusal.
11 of 11
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
What is basic intent?
Back
MR doesn't go beyond AR e.g criminal damage. Offences of basic intent can be committed recklessly. D can't use vol intox as defence (Majewski)
Comments
No comments have yet been made