Class Notes (839,473)
Canada (511,349)
LY205 (13)
Lecture

oct11,week5,thurs.odt

3 Pages
78 Views

Department
Law & Society
Course Code
LY205
Professor
Patricia O' Reilly

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 3 pages of the document.
Description
Crim Law October 11, 2012 week 5, class 2, thursday Exam: 4 chapters 20-25 mc 5 or 8 short answer an hour 20 minutes pencils, eraser, I.D, pen for short answer chapter 4- mens rea subjective vs. Objective. Actus rea and mens rea of any criminal act, have to coincide. Has to be a link there. They have to happen around the same time. Subjective: what was going through the vicitms mind at the time of the crime. Objective: imposed mens rea- reasonable person. What they ought to have been thinking at the time. Reasonable person test. Are there specific mens rea for specific crimes? Specific intent: planned and deliberate, and intent. Had it all planned, details in advance, so they knew what they were going to do. Intention and planning. Transferred intent: planned to commit murder, murder was comitted but on the wrong person. Mens rea and actus reus coincide. Direct and indirect intention: direct intention: indirect intention: thin skull theory: take the person as you see them. You don't know if the individual you are assaulting or robbing has a cardiac condition, and if they die because if you causing stress, it doesn't bode well for you. Creighton case: three friends, one day 1993, they are consuming large amounts of alcohol and cocaine. Creighton injects himself and a girl that becomes diseased, and another friend. MRS. MARTIN is female. She loses consciousness and starts convulsing. Friends name is: candeux. Candeux said call 911, we need help. Inference in the case is that creighton said no, don't touch the phone we're leaving. She stops breathing. they try to resuscitate her and all attempts fail. Clean fingerprints from around house and then left. Charter challenge of section 7, life liberty and security of the person. Mens rea objective forseeability. They tried for a dangerous action, but the people fought that they didn't mean to (no specific intent) to kill mrs. Martin. Violation of our charter right. Decision: set up test for unlawful manslaughter actus reus has to be established The activity must be a marked departure from a standard realm of care. carrying out an act in a dangerous manner, or carrying out an inherently dangerous act. Establish mens rea: the activity must have been done while there was objective foresight that harm might occur. What would a reasonable person thought? Establih capacity: were they capable of appreciating the risk flowing from their conduct? Diminished capacity? Did they have some genetic or medical condition that renders them unable to see the harm being done or future consequences? Creighton: his accomplice: tutton and tutton: son had diabetes, for religious reasons they wouldn't give him insulin. Son was 5 years old. Carol anne, arthur tutton
More Less
Unlock Document

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

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