MURDER

Dave's Potential Liability for Murder

Dave's Potential Liability for Murder Introduction

Introduction

Mens rea is a term (which translates as: guilty mind) used in the criminal law. The standard test in the common law to determine the criminal liability is commonly present with the Latin phrase, actus non nisi mens sit rheumatic facit rea, which means the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty. In jurisdictions that contain a due process must be an actus reus accompanied by a level of mens rea to constitute the crime. The exception are the crimes which ignore the intent of the actor (in the civil law is not always necessary to prove the subjective mindset of a person to establish liability, as in breach of contract, although the intention may be an aggravating factor in determining compensation). The case of Dave presents a number of challenges. When considered with regard to the Mens rea, the following discussion will help shed light on Dave's predicament.

Discussion & Analyses

Mens rea refers to the mental state of a person to make an actus reus. In certain jurisdictions, the term mens rea and the actus reus experience negative influence from a terminology choice. In Australia, for example, the elements of all federal crimes are famous as elements of guilt (Fault Elements - mens rea) and physical elements (Physical Elements - actus reus). This terminology helps to replace the Latin terms for basic phrases.

Second, for criminal responsibility also requires that state of mind of such a person had to do with the specified event or its consequences. As already noted, the principle of law provides that a person shall be criminally responsible for his behavior, if it does not have the required mental state. Mental state required for criminal liability in criminal law has traditionally referred to as the Latin term - mens rea, a material element - actus Reus. These two elements link to each other, so the actus reus would be a crime only when it is accompanied by the appropriate mens rea. If the actus reus is present without mens rea, it is not a crime and may be an ordinary decent activity. When we say that a certain event is actus reus a crime, under- razumevastsya that the event would be a crime if it is committed by a person who has the relevant mens rea. The question of what an act as an element of a crime in law is apparent as follows. The basis is the actus rcus action (an act), doing something, and, of course, that its nature varies from crime to crime. The definitions of some crimes contain a more detailed description of prohibited acts, others - less detailed, especially in those cases where we use the concepts, covering both the action itself, and its result.

A similar approach changes with respect to statutory crimes, such as obstruction of official can be any actions that interfere with the execution of lawful ...