TOPIC 2 - Subjectivism, Blame and Mental States

what is the order if the cases on the meaning of indirect intention (ID) ? (cases of moloney, woollin hyam and smith)

1 oldest) DPP v SMITH is the olderst case and initally imposed an objective test for intention

2) DPP v HYAM

3) R v Moloney

4 most recent) R v WOOLLIN → this is the leading case in ‘99 and is the def for ID = That is, foresight of the virtually certainty of the outcome occurring, where that outcome is also virtually certain to occur.

what are the characteristics of a crown court and not a magistrates’ hearing?

• Fact finding by a jury

• sentencing power greater than 6 months imprisonment

• proof beyond reasonable doubt

• Prosecution limited either to indictable or triable either way offences 

→ this is the only criminal court where facts are decided by a jury

principle of transferred malice

Where a defendant intends to shoot A but misses and kills B, murder is still established because murder is defined without reference to the identity of the victim.

Why is it useful to read reports published by the Law Commission of England and Wales?

In order to discuss potential reforms of the law

• lot’s of reforms are recommended but few are implemented

What is the difference between subjective and objective mens rea?

Subjective mens rea asks what was in D's mind; objective mens rea asks what would have been in the mind of a reasonable person

What role does the European Convention on Human Rights play within the criminal law?

It sets out a number of 'rights' that the UK is obliged to protect in the creation and application of the English and Welsh criminal law

“[I]t seems to this court that if he did not know, as he said he did not, that there was some risk of damage, he was, in effect, deliberately ___________ his mind to the obvious — the obvious being that damage in these circumstances was inevitable. In the view of this court, that type of action … is the equivalent of knowledge and a man certainly cannot escape the consequences of his action in this particular set of circumstances by saying, “I never directed my mind to the obvious consequences because I was in a self-induced state of temper.””: Parker [1977] 1 WLR 600, 604.

• fill in the missing word
  

CLOSING

The Parker case provides the doctrinal basis for the rule that where D deliberately closes his mind to an obvious risk, this will be deemed to fall within the scope of subjective recklessness

what is the hierarchy of these courts: Magistrates court, crown courts, high court, court of appeal, supreme court

1 lowest) MAGISTRATES COURT

2) Crown Court

3) High court (Kings bench division)

4) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

5 highest) Supreme Court

• Note that the seniority of these courts also reflects the strength of the precedents they create when they decide cases.