General intent means that the prosecution must prove only that the accused offender meant to do the act that is prohibited by law. Most crimes require there be general intent. If the offender intended the act’s result is irrelevant (General Intent Crimes vs. Specific Intent Crimes, 2017). For an example, battery would be considered a general intent crime because state’s law defines battery as an “intentional and harmful physical contact with another person” (General Intent Crimes vs. Specific Intent Crimes, 2017).
Specific intent crimes generally require that the offender has intentionally committed and illegal act and intended a certain result when they committed the act (General Intent Crimes vs. Specific Intent Crimes, 2017). For an
Crime is some action/omission that causes harm in a situation that the person/group responsible ‘ought’ to be held accountable and punished irrespective of what the law book of state say.
Crime can be defined as an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law.
A general intent is the most usual modus operandi for most of the misconducts. Under the general aim, the prosecution requires proving that the offender intended to commit an act in question (Herring, 2014). They are those offenses that have no particular mens rea component in them. The defendant’s act’s results are irrelevant in a general intent crime.
Intentional tort is one half of the tort law that protects people from “restraint, unauthorized touching, and any other contact that is not authorized” (112, Cheeseman). One example of intentional tort is battery, which is “ Unauthorized and harmful or offensive physical contact with a person who causes you injury, indirect physical contact is also battery as long as the end result is injury” (113, Cheeseman). This is just one example and there are many more such as assault, false imprisonment, shoplifting, invasion of the right to privacy, and many more. The difference between an intentional tort and an
This essay focuses on intentional tort, which includes trespass to person consisting of battery, assault and false imprisonment, which is actionable per se. It also examines protection from harassment act. The essay commences with a brief description of assault, battery and false imprisonment. It goes further advising the concerned parties on the right to claim they have in tort law and the development of the law over the years, with the aid of case law, principles and statutes.
Many people associate the need for a criminal defense attorney with those charged with a felony. Thinking the need for legal counsel is not necessary when charged with a misdemeanor. But this is not true, and the consequences can be severe. The following are a few reasons to consider hiring a lawyer for a misdemeanor charge.
When discussing how criminal intent relates to the enforcement of environmental laws first you must know what criminal intent means. USLEGAL.COM defines criminal intent as “the intent to do something wrong or forbidden by law.” (Criminal Intent Law & Legal Definition) To help one understand the meaning of intent, it is when a person make the conscious decision to break the law. (What is CRIMINAL INTENT) With environmental laws and regulations, it states that one must knowingly commit an environmental crime in order to prosecute as a criminal. As discussed in the week three lecture notes we learned that under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, if a person is knowingly transporting hazardous waste without a warrant than that person could be prosecuted criminally and face up to two years in prison and up to a $50,000 a day fine.( Week Three Lecture Notes)
It is considered to be a deliberate act on the defendant’s part to cause the harm that occurs. In my opinion the, this was not intentional. McDonald was not wilful in trying to harm Liebeck. Intentionally trying to hurt Liebeck would mean loss of revenue and reputation for McDonald and I firmly believe that is a risk they were not willing to take hence, why it is not intentional tort case. Also, to act with intent would mean to see someone coming and hurting them in the process. This was not the case for Liebeck, she bought the coffee and went back to the car and then the coffee
In terms of offences that require mens-rea or intent as a constituent element, a condition which prevents an individual from forming the necessary mental condition is generally taken as an excuse and this explanation has been accepted by number of theorists of criminal law and on basis of this I would like to refer some judgments of Common Law Context.
A crime consists of an actus reus and a mens rea, in order to obtain a conviction of a criminal charge there must be a concurrence between the actus reus and mens rea. The elements of a criminal act (actus reus) are: act, cause, social harm or omission condemned under a criminal statute (Lippman, 2012). The elements of mens rea: purposely, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently (Lippman, 2012). Attempted murder is the failed attempt to kill another human being deliberately, intentionally or recklessly (USLegal, 2014). “Georgia Code Title 16, Section 16-4-1: A person commits the offense of criminal attempt when, with intent to commit a specific crime, he performs any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that crime. Section 16-4-2: A person may be convicted of the offense of criminal attempt if the crime attempted was actually committed in pursuance of the attempt but may not be convicted of both the criminal attempt and the completed crime….” (Young, 2014, para. 1-2).
To be criminally liable of any crime in the UK, a jury has to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the Actus Reus and the Mens Rea. The Actus Reus is the physical element of the crime; it is Latin for ‘guilty act’. The defendant’s act must be voluntary, for criminal liability to be proven. The Mens Rea is Latin for guilty mind; it is the most difficult to prove of the two. To be pronounced guilty of a crime, the Mens Rea requires that the defendant planned, his or her actions before enacting them. There are two types of Mens Rea; direct intention and oblique intention. Direct intention ‘corresponds with everyday definition of intention, and applies where the accused actually wants the result that occurs, and sets out to achieve it’ (Elliot & Quinn, 2010: 59). Oblique intention is when the ‘accused did not desire a particular result but in acting he or she did realise that it might occur’ (Elliot & Quinn, 2010: 60). I will illustrate, by using relevant case law, the difference between direct intention and oblique intention.
The mens rea of murder requires intent or recklessness to kill or cause grievous boldily harm. Foresight of the consequences of the defendant 's voluntary actions are often enough to infer intent using the Nedrick test. This can lead to some cases, such as Hancock and Shankland, where the defendants neither intended death nor injury, were tried for murder.
Crime is an act in violation of a law, unlawful activity, an unjust, senseless, a disgraceful act or condition. A natural crime is an act that is harmful to the society in which one lives. Natural crimes are crimes in any society at any age, and whether or not the crimes are committed by people who are in authority or not. Crimes are forms of unloving behavior that cannot and should not be overlooked. Any natural crime against an individual is a crime against the entire society. Natural crimes are obvious crimes with obvious victims. People who commit robberies, murders, theft, rape, blackmail, extortion, and kidnapping are committing natural crimes. Natural crimes are considered serious crimes against society. Natural crimes are crimes that are committed intentionally, negligently, recklessly, and knowingly. Natural crimes cause the most harm, occur more frequently and are more widespread.
Criminal Liability “In a just society criminal liability should never be imposed without some degree of blameworthiness” Offences of strict liability are those, which do not require any mens. rea with regard to at least one or more of the actus rea. The mens rea usually requires intention and recklessness. However, some crimes are possible to commit without any knowledge. intention or responsibility on behalf of the defendant.