Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Intent is defined in English law by the ruling in R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence" (malum prohibitum). [1] [2] [3]A range of words represents shades of intent in criminal laws around the world.
In law, knowledge is one of the degrees of mens rea that constitute part of a crime.For example, in English law, the offence of knowingly being a passenger in a vehicle taken without consent requires that the prosecution prove not only that the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle and that it was taken by the driver without consent, but also that the defendant knew that it was taken without ...
Judges normally do not define intention for juries, and the weight of authority is to give it its current meaning in everyday language as directed by the House of Lords in R v Moloney, [1] where can be found references to a number of definitions of intention using subjective and objective tests, and knowledge of consequences of actions or omissions.
Willful ignorance is sometimes called willful blindness, contrived ignorance, conscious avoidance, intentional ignorance or Nelsonian knowledge. The jury instruction for willful blindness is sometimes called the " ostrich instruction ".
It is sufficient for the plaintiff to prove only that the accused had sufficient knowledge to foresee the contact with "substantial certainty." The Court, noting that a new trial was unnecessary, [4] remanded the case back to the trial court for clarification of the boy's knowledge at the time. Subsequently, the trial Court found in favor of ...
In R v Matthews and Alleyne, [4] the Court of Appeal concluded that the Woollin test was an evidential rather than substantial rule of law: judges ought to instruct jurors that they may interpret what they would see as certain knowledge on the defendant's part of the virtually certain consequence of death as evidence of intention, but Woollin ...
The Williams Rule is based on the holding in the Florida state case of Williams v. State [1] in which relevant evidence of collateral crimes is admissible at jury trial when it does not go to prove the "bad character" or "criminal propensity" of the defendant but is used to show motive, intent, knowledge, modus operandi, or lack of mistake.
Mens rea refers to the crime's mental elements of the defendant's intent. This is a necessary element—that is, the criminal act must be voluntary or purposeful. Mens rea is the mental intention (mental fault), or the defendant's state of mind at the time of the offense, sometimes called the guilty mind. It stems from the ancient maxim of ...