Criminal law (1 Viewer)

[A12345]

Hey guys,
I'm still a little confused regarding actus reus and mens rea. I get that they must coincide for common law offences, but where the offence is statutory is it possible to have like 3 actus reus and 1 mens rea?? Like for possession, if I understand it's
AR
1) Possess a drug= act, proved by having exclusive physical control
2) The drug is a prohibited drug under the drug misuse and trafficking act= circumstance, proved by the drug being analysed

MR)
1) intention to possess
2) knowledge that the drug was a prohibited drug/likely to be

Is that right?

And then you have offences like Riot where there are like 6 AR, and only 1 MR because that is how the legislation has specified it?

So if the legislation is silent as to MR then match up each AR of the offence with a MR,
but if the legislation specifies a MR then there may be more AR then there are MR?

 

[Trans4M]

Actus Reus - is the physical component of a crime. it usually involves an act but can also be an omission

Mens Rea - is the mental component of a crime. It's usually the intention to do something however, it's not always the case. You can recklessly do something and mens rea can still be made out.

What you sort of posted up are requirements to establish actus reus and mens rea and yes you are correct, they need to both coincide. There can be more than one requirement to make out mens rea or actus reus.

Not all offences require mens rea. Sometimes the legislation because mens rea is not required. For e.g. strict liability offences don't require an intention.

Hope that helps.

EDIT:

Its important to note whether they are AND or OR.

For e.g. in murder the mens rea can be: (if i remember correctly)
* intention to kill; OR
* intention to cause GBH; OR
* reckless indifference; OR

In that case only one of them needs to be satisfied to establish mens rea.

However in cases where its like: (I am making this up as an example)
* an intention to posses; AND
* knowledge that it was a prohibited drug

Both needs to be made out for there to be mens rea

 

[A12345]

Thanks!
so we would structure an answer like this in a problem Q, like break each bit up and state the evidence for it?

AR)
Possession:
Had possession because e.g. had exclusive physical control of the drug in their hand..

Substance is prohibited drug:
Yes, drug is listed in Act.


MR)
1) intended to possess
Can be proved because...

2) Had knowledge of
Can be proved because..

 

[Trans4M]

Thanks!
so we would structure an answer like this in a problem Q, like break each bit up and state the evidence for it?

AR)
Possession:
Had possession because e.g. had exclusive physical control of the drug in their hand..

Substance is prohibited drug:
Yes, drug is listed in Act.


MR)
1) intended to possess
Can be proved because...

2) Had knowledge of
Can be proved because..

Yeap I would do that. I know it's a bit disjointed but it's the best way to ensure you cover all the elements of the offence

 

[A12345]

Thanks for your help!