WDW225 Lecture 7

6 Pages
126 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Woodsworth College Courses
Course
WDW101Y1
Professor
Jim Davies
Semester
Fall

Description
WDW225 Lecture 7 11/01/2012 Mens Rea Continued Mens Rea – Recap Mens Rea can relate to 1. The prohibited act 2. The prescribed consequence 3. The prescribed circumstances Objective Mens Rea Subjective Mens Rea  What would reasonable person  What did the accused know know, understand, intend? understood or intended?  What did the accused knew or  What was in the mind of the ought to have known? accused at the time?  No need for the Crown to prove  Not sufficient to prove the what the accused actually knew, accused ought to have known understood, intended or ought to have understood Murder STEP 1: Is there a homicide (s. 222)? s. 222(1) A person commits homicide when, directly or indirectly, by any means he causes the death of a human being STEP 2: Is the homicide culpable (s. 222)? Manslaughter the lowest culpability s. 222(5) A person commits culpable homicide when he causes the death of a human being, (a) By means of an unlawful act (b) By criminal negligence * Must prove that the homicide was at least manslaughter (killing someone kill someone that you don’t mean to kill them) to further prove that it was murder. STEP 3: Is it murder (s. 229 + s. 230)? s. 229 – Culpable homicide is murder (a) where the person who causes the death (i) means to cause his death, or (ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not; *Ones intention can change from manslaughter to murder (c) where a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that he knows or ought to know is likely to cause death and causes death (whether or not he wanted to kill or cause bodily harm) Mens Rea and Murder STEP 3: Is it murder continued (s. 230)? s. 230 – Culpable homicide is murder where a person causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit one of the enumerated offences assault a peace officer, sexual assault, kidnapping, forcible confinement, robbery, break and enter, arson whether or not the person means to cause death to any human being and whether or not he knows that death is likely to be caused to any human being if (a) he means to cause bodily harm for the purpose of facilitating the offence or his flight and death ensues (d) he uses a weapon or has it upon his person during the offence or flight and death ensues as a consequence STEP 4: Is it first or second degree murder (s. 231)? s. 231 (2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate (4) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder when the victim is (a) a peace officer... (5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections (includes hijacking, sexual assault, kidnapping Manslaughter > second degree murder > first degree murder (planned and deliberate) *Mens Rea and Murder STEP 1: Is there a homicide (s. 222)? STEP 2: Is the homicide culpable (s. 222)? All culpable homicide is manslaughter STEP 3: Is it murder (ss. 229 and 230)? STEP 4: Is it first degree murder (s. 231)? Mens rea and the Charter Section 7 of the Charter: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Section 7 REQUIRES that all criminal offences (which carry risk of a deprivation of liberty) must have a mens rea requirement R. v. Vaillancourt (1987, S.C.C.) FACTS: armed robbery at a pool hall; Vaillancourt had a knife; co-accused had a gun; Vaillancourt thought co-accused’s gun was not loaded; Vaillancourt stayed at the front; co- accused shot the victim; convicted of 2 degree murder (s229/230 c) ISSUES: (1) is objective foreseeability a permissible form of mens rea for murder? (2) does s. 7 require subjective mens rea for some offences? (3) can/should we substitute intent to commit the “unlawful purpose” for intent to kill? RULING - Something less than subjective foresight of the result may be sufficient for some offences - Special nature of the stigma attached to a conviction or the available penalty, the principles of fundamental justice require subjective mens rea o Theft o Murder - Principles of fundamental justice require subjective mens rea (or subjective foresight) for murder - Objective mens rea in s. 229(c) is unconstitutional - Most offences (criminal) subjective mens rea is not required - Most offences objective mens rea will be sufficient to the CCRF What about substitute mens rea in s. 230(d)? o murder = accused uses a weapon during the offence and death ensues whether or not the person means to cause death o does not have to prove mens rea for murder o Crown just has to prove mens rea for intentionally carrying weapon o PROBLEM – does not require proof of objective OR subjective foreseeability of death o violates s. 7 of the Charter R. v. Martineau FACTS - Martineau and Tremblay engaged in a break and enter - Martineau had a pellet gun and Tremblay had a rifle; - Tremblay shot and killed the occupants - Martineau asked him why he killed them and Tremblay said “they saw our faces” Charged under s. 230(a) – culpable homicide is murder if death is caused during the course of committing break and enter regardless of whether or not he means to cause death or knows death is a likely consequence ISSUE: does s. 230(a) violate s. 7 of the Charter? ANSWER: yes  s. 230 (a) does not require subjective foresight of death  punishment must be proportionate to the moral blameworthiness of the offender  stigma and punishment for murder only justified because of proof of subjective intent  no objective mens rea permissible for murder the crown must prove subjective forsight Does s. 7 require subjective mens rea for manslaughter? Manslaughter = culpable homicide where death is caused by (a) unlawful act (b)criminal negligence Manslaughter carries no mandatory minimum penalty R.v. Creighton (1993, SCC) FACTS: “unlawful act manslaughter” - Purchased an “eight ball” of cocaine - Injected cocaine into the deceased arm - Deceased consen
More Less

Related notes for WDW101Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit