Study Guides (238,207)
Canada (115,009)
Philosophy (363)

The Guilty Mind

5 Pages
Unlock Document

Western University
Philosophy 2080
James Hildebrand

CRIMINAL LAW THE GUILTY MIND PAPPAJOHN v R McINTYRE J y The appellant appeals his rape conviction y Upon the ground that the trial judge failed to put to the jury the defence of mistake of fact y The complainant well known and well established real estate agent in Vancouver was successful in her work The appellant is a businessman who was anxious to sell his home in Vancouver She was to be responsible for the matter on her firms behalf She met with the appellant by appointment at a downtown restaurant for lunch It lasted for 3 hours during this time a great deal of liquor was consumed Each seemed capable of functioning normally however y Appellant drove the complainants car while she sat in the front passenger seat She related a story of rape completely against her will and over her protests and struggles He spoke of an amorous interlude involving no more than a bit of coy objection on her part and several acts of intercourse with her consenty The complainant ran out of the house naked with a mans bow tie around her neck and her hands tightly tied behind her back with a bathrobe sash She arrived at the door of a house nearby and demanded entry and protection The man was a priest y The jury was excluded while counsel for the appellant argued that on the facts of the case as it appeared from the evidence y The appellant was entitled to have the judge tell the jury that if the appellant entertained an honest though mistaken belief that the complainant was consenting to the acts of intercourse as they occurred the necessary mens rea would not be present and the appellant would be entitled to an acquittaly The complainant has testified that the accused had intercourse with her during a 3 hours period some 5 times without her consent y Although the concept of mens rea underlies all criminal prosecutions no obligation to instruct a jury in connection with this concept y Defence counsel has suggested that acts of familiarity prior to the time of intercourse independently testified to by disinterested personsalluded to only oral and token resistance to his advances yNotwithstanding the forceful submission of defence counsel I do not recognize in the evidence any sufficient basis of fact to leave the defence of mistake of fact to this jury
More Less

Related notes for Philosophy 2080

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.