Mens rea and actus reus: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{g}}A guity mind, from the axiomatic Latin expression which founds the English criminal law, ''actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea''<ref>You see this often articulated as...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{g}}A guity mind, from the axiomatic Latin expression which founds the English criminal law, ''actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea''<ref>You see this often articulated as “actus ''reus'' non facit reum nisi mens sit rea,” but with my rudimentary grasp of Latin, that is a reus too far.</ref>An act is not guilty unless the mind is guilty.  This is the principle of liability, and feeds into the [[degrees of liability]] we so often see: [[intention]], [[recklessness]], [[gross negligence]], [[negligence]] and [[blameless inadvertence]].
{{g}}A guilty mind, from the axiomatic Latin expression which founds the English criminal law, ''actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea'':<ref>You see this often articulated as “actus ''reus'' non facit reum nisi mens sit rea,” but with my rudimentary grasp of Latin, that is a reus too far.</ref> “An ''act'' is not guilty unless the ''mind'' is guilty”. What counts as a guilty mind will depend on the offence, or wrong, in question. For criminal acts, it will generally be [[intention]] or [[recklessness]]; for [[strict liability]] offences and torts, more likely no more than [[gross negligence]] or [[negligence]]. Only the [[blameless inadvertence|blamelessly inadvertent]] get away unscathed, and even they can fall prey to offences of [[absolute liability]].


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[degrees of liability]]
*[[degrees of liability]]
{{ref}}
{{ref}}
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Mens_rea_and_actus_reus"