THE ELEMENTS OF CRIME

actus reus & mens rea

Review: The Meaning of Crime

Before we begin…

1. Define “crime”2. Give an example of a new type of crime3. Give an example of something which was once a crime,

but is no longer a crime4. Explain why laws relating to crime change over time5. List the main ways that criminal law is different to civil law

Before a criminal trial can occur, two fundamental elements of a case must be demonstrated by the DPP

Latin for ‘guilty act’ Physically

committing the crime

Must be a voluntary act (no duress), BUT can also be a failure to act (esp. when ‘duty of care’ exists)

Latin for ‘guilty mind’ Intending to commit

the crime Must understand what

was happening when the crime was committed, and what the consequences would be

Actus reus Mens rea

The three main levels of mens rea are:

Intention Recklessness Criminal negligence

• Clear, malicious or wilful intention to commit the crime

• The highest and most difficult level of mens rea to prove

• Awareness that one’s actions could lead to a crime being committed, but continuing with the behaviour

• Intermediate level of intent

• Prosecution must prove that a ‘reasonable person’ would understand

• Failure to foresee the risk when one should have, allowing avoidable danger to occur – usually resulting in harm to or death of another person

• Lowest level of intent

• Higher standard of proof than civil negligence

Identify actus reus and mens rea in the following articles

Media Articles

Cop Brett McCormick pleads not guilty to reckless conduct over high-speed chase

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/cop-brett-mccormick-pleads-not-guilty-to-reckless-conduct-over-highspeed-chase/story-fnii5sms-1226813187081

JANUARY 29, 2014

A POLICE officer who rammed into a fleeing offender's vehicle during a high-speed pursuit has pleaded not guilty to reckless conduct.

Leading Sen-Constable Brett McCormick, 38, was behind the wheel of a marked police vehicle with his lights flashing on Wellington Rd, Mulgrave when he executed a U-turn and crashed into an oncoming Commodore driven by Aaron Vilbro in January 2012.

Vilbro, who later told police he had been recently released from jail, had failed to stop when an unmarked police SS station wagon driven by Sgt Dean Pickering tried to intercept him for speeding and gave chase from Wheelers Hill, a County Court jury heard yesterday.

Video evidence from a camera in Sgt Pickering's vehicle of the subsequent pursuit was shown in court and depicted Vilbro's Commodore speeding and continually crossing to the wrong side of the road. Sgt Pickereing used his police radio to update D24 and a pursuit controller as the chase continued and Sen-Constable McCormick positioned his vehicle in Wellington Rd to prepare to take over the pursuit, the court heard. As the Commodore entered Wellington off Springvale Rd it accelerated and then slowed and Sen-Constable McCormick's police sedan collided with the right-hand side of Vilbro's vehicle, the jury heard. The court was told police had no policy of ramming cars in order to end a pursuit.

When arrested, Vilbro was asked about endangering other drivers and said "it's not my problem", the court was told. He was uninjured in the crash and three other males were in his vehicle Amphetamines and a scale were found in Vilbro's vehicle and he was charged with a range of traffic offences and later pleaded guilty to evading police, the court heard.

Defence lawyer Geoffrey Steward said it was "totally rejected and denied by the defence the allegation that Brett McCormick deliberately drove into the car driven by Aaron Vilbro ... although Vilbro was driving in a reckless, dangerous and hoon-like manner."

But prosecutor Bill Stougiannos said the Crown alleged "this ramming of the vehicle was an unreasonable act on his (McCormick's) part, an unnecessary action, an unlawful action.“ Sen-Constable McCormick yesterday pleaded not guilty to reckless conduct that may have placed others in danger of serious injury.

The trial, before Judge Sue Pullen continues.

Man charged after assaulting paramedic

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nsw/man-charged-after-assaulting-paramedic-20140202-31uh1.html

FEBRUARY 2, 2014

A 21-year-old man has been charged after allegedly assaulting a female ambulance paramedic in the city overnight.

About 2.20am Sunday, police attached to Operation Simmer were patrolling George Street, Haymarket, when they came across the man who they said was unresponsive and possibly intoxicated.

Officers called for assistance from NSW Ambulance, whose paramedics attended a short time later.

Police allege that as a female paramedic attempted to treat the man, he struck her in the face and pushed her to the ground, before starting to kick her.

Police intervened and – after a short struggle – the man was arrested.

The paramedic, who has taken time off from work, suffered wrist and back injuries, as well as contusions to her face, a NSW Ambulance spokeswoman said.

The Plumpton man was taken to Sydney City Police Station and charged with common assault.

He was granted conditional bail to appear before the Downing Centre Local Court on February 24.

Operation Simmer, which focuses on Sydney's CBD, Darlinghurst and Kings Cross, is conducted in the city every weekend as part of a summer-long crackdown targeting alcohol-related crime and anti-social behaviour.

R v Thomas Sam; R v Manju Sam (no. 18) [2009] NSWSC 1003

See p7 of your textbook

Identify the mens rea and actus

reus in this case.

Your thoughts

Can you think of any examples where mens rea might not be present?

Eg: mental illness, age of criminal understanding (doli incopax)

Does this help to achieve justice?

Evaluate the extent to which the law balances the rights of victims, offenders and society.

Essay question