CRIM 2652 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Actus Reus, Mens Rea, Mandatory Sentencing
2 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Civil law
Civil law: regulates disputes between individuals
- Includes property law & contract law
- Private parties can bring action in disputes
- Remedies of monetary compensation (not jail)
Civil vs. Criminal law
Civil
Criminal Law
Objective
Compensation
punishment
Focus
Consequences
Criminal act (mens rea /
actus reus)
Rule of Evidence
Must provide information
No self - incrimination
Causality / Standard of proof
Balance of probabilities
Beyond a reasonable doubt
Relevance of Law
Retroactivity
No retroactivity
Civil law
- You and the other party have to bring all the information to the court, that is relevant
- Standard is on balance of probability, example - the neighbour knew that he was
dumping trash on his side of the lawn
- Allows retroactivity - can go back in time and pick out crime that they committed in the
past that was legal then but is illegal now
Criminal law
- Defendant does not have to bring any documentation to the court
- No requirement for self incrimination
- Presumption of innocence, defendant does not have to bring any evidence, the
prosecution have to bring all the information to prove the case
- Causality or the standard of proof is higher
- No retroactivity meaning that you cannot go back in time and what was legal at time and
is illegal now, it cannot be used in court now
Reverse Onus
- Exception to onus on prosecution, shifting the burden of proof, often seen as
controversial, R.v. Oakes (1986)
- Onus means that prosecution has to being the evidence
- Reverse Onus means that defendant has to bring evidence saying they are not guilty
Actus reus & Mens rea
- Two elements: actus reus & mens rea
- Mens rea: refers to wrongful intention of accused
- Intent: carrying out act intentionally, knowingly & willingly
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Private parties can bring action in disputes. Causality / standard of proof balance of probabilities. You and the other party have to bring all the information to the court, that is relevant. Standard is on balance of probability, example - the neighbour knew that he was dumping trash on his side of the lawn. Allows retroactivity - can go back in time and pick out crime that they committed in the past that was legal then but is illegal now. Defendant does not have to bring any documentation to the court. Presumption of innocence, defendant does not have to bring any evidence, the prosecution have to bring all the information to prove the case. Causality or the standard of proof is higher. No retroactivity meaning that you cannot go back in time and what was legal at time and is illegal now, it cannot be used in court now.
