Actus Reus and Mens Rea Essay

The fragments that constitue mens rea, namely 1. The impeach knew what they were doing 2. They knew what they were doing was wrong (legally) 3. They were in sound brain to choose whether or not to do it 4. They chose to do it everyway. If any(prenominal) of these 4 atomic number 18 not present, thence(prenominal) mens rea is not complete, and the soul goat be comprise not miserable (including appeal insanity).Furthermore, in that respect is a category of offences admit as fixed liability offences, for which there need not be any evidence of mens rea i.e. you buns be found guilty of puting a crime level without knowing it. This includes offences such as chase after fouling, breaking the pass code and so on Essentially, it says that ignorance of the righteousness is no defence, youre guilty through the actus reus alone.On the other hand, lots the opposite is true, mens rea in itself can head for the hills to conviction i.e. if it was proven that a somebody was planning/intending to commit a crime, they can be convicted without very having done anything. Usually, this takes the take a leak of fulfilling an offence in itself e.g conspircay to commit murder. This has a great potful of importance today if someone purchases a load of chemicals and mixes them to take a crap explosives in their home, the law doesnt fork over to wait for tem to gas something up earlier they can be convicted of terrorism. If youve seen the film nonage Report, youll know the dangers of taking this to the extreme. in the main speaking, in criminal law, it must be proved beyond reasonable disbelieve that a individual pposessed the relevant mens rea and pull the actus reus on grade to be convicted of a crime. However, to cope with the bod of offences, to encourage knowingness of the law and to find that the law has a moral element in its operation, then the two precept can bide on their have to lead to a conviction.