CRM 200 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Actus Reus, Regulatory Offence, Mens Rea
3 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Lecture 6 - Proof and Prosecution
Burden of Proof
Criminal Case,
- eg, fraud:
• Presumption of innocence
• Crown bears burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt: no burden
on accused to prove innocence, entitled to acquittal/finding of not
guilty where raises reasonable doubt
• Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt applies to all elements
of offence: mens rea element (mental element/guilty mind/fault)
and actus reus (physical element/prohibited act or consequence)
Judge asks do you want to plead guilty or not guilty
---
Plea inquiry – has to be done when someone pleads guilty in court,
helps to understand and make awareness that they are guilty in court
---
Whether or not to give evidence or not in a trial – makes sure that the
accused understand that they have an option to provide evidence |
-—
Due to the presumption of innocence, the accused is not forced to
provide evidence yet they are offered the option to |
Elements of Fraud offence to be proven beyond reason doubt by
Crown:
• Actus Reus (physical act)
o 1. prohibited act, be it act of deceit, falsehood or some
other fraudulent means, and
o 2. deprivation caused by the prohibited act, which may
consist in actual loss or placing of victim’s pecuniary
interests at risk
• Mens Rea (mental requirement)
o 1. subjective knowledge of the prohibited act, and
o 2. subjective knowledge that the prohibited act could
have as a consequence the deprivation of another (which
deprivation may consist in knowledge that the victim’s
pecuniary interests are put at risk)
Regulatory
Offences,
- eg.,
misleading
advertising;
failure to
comply with
demand:
• Presumption of innocence
• Crown bears burden of proof of guilt
• Elements of Offence to be proved depend on category of
regulatory offence in question: mens rea; strict liability; absolute
liability
• Upon proof of prohibited act (speeding) prosecution has to prove
that you drove above speed limit, no defense – Absolute Liability
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Regulatory Offences categories:
• Mens rea:
o Crown must prove beyond reasonable doubt both
prohibited act (actus reus) and mens rea (guilty mind),
as if prosecution for criminal offence, but these remain
regulatory offences in nature
• Strict liability:
o Crown must prove prohibited act beyond reasonable
doubt;
o onus then shifts to defendant to prove lack of fault by
due diligence or reasonable mistaken belief in fact,
o on civil standard of proof (balance of
probabilities/preponderance of doubt) in which case
defendant entitled to acquittal
▪ Because there’s no fault element
involved, the defendant is not able to put
forth the defence of no intention; he is
however able to put forth certain
common law defences, such as necessity
• Absolute liability:
o Crown must prove prohibited act beyond a reasonable
doubt,
o no defence of lack of fault may be raised, although there
may be other defences,
▪ eg., necessity, officially induced error of
law, de minimus
• Regulatory offences presumed to be strict liability
• Burden of proof for strict liability:
o Doing of prohibited act prima facie imports the offence,
• leaving it open to accused to avoid liability by
proving that he/she took all reasonable care
o While prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt
that the defendant committed prohibited act,
• defendant must only establish on balance or
probabilities that he/she has defence of
reasonable care
o It is not enough just to raise a reasonable doubt when
asserting due diligence defence –
• burden of raising reasonable doubt is not as
great as that of establishing due diligence
defence
o Where defendant relies on defence of due diligence,
onus of proof shifts to defendant to establish reasonable
care on balance of probabilities
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Judge asks do you want to plead guilty or not guilty. Plea inquiry has to be done when someone pleads guilty in court, helps to understand and make awareness that they are guilty in court. Whether or not to give evidence or not in a trial makes sure that the accused understand that they have an option to provide evidence | Due to the presumption of innocence, the accused is not forced to provide evidence yet they are offered the option to | Elements of fraud offence to be proven beyond reason doubt by. Offences, eg. , misleading advertising; failure to comply with demand: Issue of due diligence and reasonable care mandates practical and evidence-based analysis, rather than unrealistic, speculative approach. Question 3: misleading advertising: wc inc. charged with false advertising brochure promotion for electronic toys that are not available on first day of sale: material misrepresentation as to availability of product.
