enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Recklessness (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recklessness_(law)

    The modern definition of recklessness has developed from R v Cunningham [1957] 2 QB 396 in which the definition of 'maliciously' for the purposes of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 was held to require a subjective rather than objective test when a man released gas from the mains while attempting to steal money from the pay-meter. As a ...

  3. R v G - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_G

    R v G [a] [2003] is an English criminal law ruling on reckless damage, for which various offences it held that the prosecution must show a defendant subjectively appreciated a particular risk existing or going to exist to the health or property of another, and the damaging consequence, but carried on in the circumstances known to him unreasonably taking the risk.

  4. Actus reus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_reus

    In criminal law, actus reus (/ ˈ æ k t ə s ˈ r eɪ ə s /; pl.: actus rei), Latin for "guilty act", is one of the elements normally required to prove commission of a crime in common law jurisdictions, the other being Latin: mens rea ("guilty mind").

  5. Criminal negligence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

    objective where the court imputes mens rea elements on the basis that a reasonable person with the same general knowledge and abilities as the accused would have had those elements; or; hybrid, i.e., the test is both subjective and objective. The most culpable mens rea elements will have both foresight and desire on a subjective basis ...

  6. Strict liability (criminal) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal)

    In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which mens rea (Law Latin for "guilty mind") does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the actus reus ("guilty act") although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offense (Preterintentionally [1] [2] /ultraintentional [3] /versari in re illicita).

  7. Counterman v. Colorado - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterman_v._Colorado

    Some standards were based on whether a "reasonable person" would interpret the statement as threatening, known as an "objective" standard. Others were "subjective" standards based on the speaker's recklessness as to their statement's threatening nature, knowledge that their statement will be seen as a threat, or intent that their statement be a ...

  8. Criminal damage in English law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_damage_in_English_law

    The mens rea of all offences in the Act is direct or oblique intention, or subjective recklessness as defined by the House of Lords in R v G (2003). [31] Bingham L.J. stated that a person acts "recklessly" with respect to (i) a circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it exists or will exist; or

  9. Intoxication defense - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication_defense

    (b) objective where the requisite mens rea element is imputed to the accused on the basis that the reasonable person would have had the mental element in the same circumstances; (c) hybrid where the test is both subjective and objective. The rationale for the existence of criminal laws is as a deterrent to those who represent a danger to society.