The mens rea is defined as being "malice aforethought, expressed or implied". However, should the answer be yes to the…. Therefore, the courts would be entitled to find that Harry did indeed commit the required actus reus for a murder, be it a voluntary, unlawful action or an omission.
It is a little unclear when considering Harry, whether he intended the fire to cause the death of Matt, but either type of malice aforethought would find Harry in possession of the required mens rea.
Whilst Harry may well have the required actus reus, the courts would need to again be sure he has the required mens rea.
Should the answer be no to these, then the defendant has oblique intent and cannot be found guilty. I am answering from the Jun 11 paper -I have highlighted every case and act I have used- According to the scenario, Matt has died as a consequence of the first started by Harry.
For the jury to find Harry liable, they would need to be sure that he has the required actus reus and mens.
Expressed malice aforethought simply means the defendant went out with the intention to kill, whilst implied states that the defendant meerly intended to cause grevious bodily harm R v Vickers.
Therefore, the jury would be entitled to consider whether he is indeed liable for the common law offence of murder. R v Nedrick raises two questions; was the otucome virtually certain, and did the defendant forsee this these were confirmed in the case of R v Woollin?
The defendants must be unlawful, and the victims death must be as a direct consequence. Whilst there appears to be no issue with causation, the course would still need to give consideration for causation in fact, involving the use of the "but for" test R v Paggettand legal causation R v Smith.
They could perhaps take into account any possible, unmentioned novus actus intervins R v Jordanbut again there appears to be no issue here.
In the case of Harry, he created a problem, which started a chain of events, of which he failed to deal with responsabely R v Miller ; therefore, by falling under this exception by failing to put out the fire, or take responsability for his actions, he could be found to have this actus reus under an omission.
However, they would also be entitled to find Harry guilty under an omission, provided that it came within one of the four main exceptions. The real problem, however, when considering the mens rea of a murder, is the foresight of consequences.Fault Essay English law is largely based on the idea that there should be no liability without proof of fault.
Fault implies a sense of blameworthiness, the concept of which is evident in both the criminal and civil law. Nov 21, · I'm re-sitting my a level law (with AQA doing criminal law) and I think its the way i'm writing my essays that is letting me down I read somewhere that writing a law essay is nothing like writing say a history essay.
Sep 03, · Expert Reviewed. How to Write a Law Essay. Six Parts: Choosing an Essay Topic Researching Your Topic Drafting the Essay Formatting Your Essay Proofreading the Essay Revising the Essay Community Q&A In a college legal studies course, and in some law school courses, you may be required to write a research 82%(39).
Whilst you don't need to have studied Law at A level to go on to study it at university it is a subject that won't hold you back should you consider doing so.
In brief the study of Law at this level includes the role of various legal institutions. Law Essays Unless you are told otherwise, the very minimum requirements of a law essay or problem question are an introduction, a body and a conclusion.
Introduction: As a very rough guide, for essay style questions, the introduction will represent about 10% of your word count, outlining perhaps a brief interpretation of the question and what you intend.
Question: “In most societies there is a conflict between individual privacy, civil liberties and the need to provide adequate protection for the community.” Answer: Change is omnipresent, and over time the balance between individual privacy, civil.Download