Actus Reus and Mens Rea Essay

The elements that constitue mens rea, videlicet 1. The accused knew what they were doing 2. They knew what they were doing was wrong (legally) 3. They were in sound mind to choose whether or not to do it 4. They chose to do it anyway. If any of these 4 are not present, then mens rea is not complete, and the person can be build not sheepish (including pleading insanity).Furthermore, there is a category of offences known as strict obligation offences, for which there need not be any evidence of mens rea i.e. you can be found guilty of commiting a crime even without knowing it. This includes offences such as dog fouling, breaking the highway cipher etc. Essentially, it says that ignorance of the law is no defence, youre guilty through the actus reus alone.On the other hand, often the antagonist is true, mens rea in itself can lead to conviction i.e. if it was proved that a person was planning/intending to commit a crime, they can be convicted without actually having done anything. Usually, this takes the form of fulfilling an offence in itself e.g conspircay to commit murder. This has a capacious deal of importance today if someone purchases a load of chemicals and mixes them to create explosives in their home, the law doesnt have to wait for tem to blow something up before they can be convicted of terrorism. If youve seen the film Minority plow, youll know the dangers of taking this to the extreme.Broadly speaking, in criminal law, it must be proved beyond healthy doubt that a person pposessed the relevant mens rea and committed the actus reus on order to be convicted of a crime. However, to share with the variety of offences, to encourage awareness of the law and to ensure that the law has a moral element in its operation, then the two doctrine can stand on their own to lead to a conviction.