Five Elements Of Crime

The substantive branch of criminal law is responsible for defining crime. Every crime contains physical and mental elements that must be present for a crime to have legally occurred. If any component, physical or mental, is not able to be proven, the criminal suspect will be exonerated. The mental and physical elements that legally constitute a crime must be present at the same time. It must also be proven that the suspect was the cause of the crime and, of course, that an actual crime was committed. These elements are extremely important factors in determining whether a suspect is guilty or innocent.

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

Crimes all have two fundamental elements that must be present in order for an act or omission of duty to be classified as a criminal act. This involves the concept of actus reus or ‘guilty act’ in Latin and mens reus or ‘guilty mind’ in Latin. It is the role of the prosecution to prove that these elements are present to charge a person with a criminal act.

The five principles of a crime are the guilty act or actus reus, the guilty intent or mens rea, the relationship between guilty act and guilty intent, the attendant circumstances and the results. The guilty act or actus reus is the inception of a crime, “this criminal liability occurs only after a voluntary act that results in criminal harm” (Neubauer & Fradella, 2014). This protects Americans from being punished for bad thoughts. The guilty intent or mens rea establishes and distinguishes between the mental state required in committing a crime. This insures that Americans are not prosecuted for innocently causing harm to another. The relationship and union between the guilty act and the guilty intent further distinguishes an act from being

In this assignment I am going to explain the main elements of law, including detailed examples that are true and relevant to the case to illustrate the meaning of this.

All crimes consisted of an act is carried out with minds that have planned a guilty thought according to common law. Criminal intent can be the basis of fault and punishment according to intent is a solid promise of the criminal justice according to modern society. Crimes that lack the intent element are less common and are usually graded lower, as either misdemeanors or infractions. Specific intent is the intent with the highest level of culpability for crimes other than murder. Specific intent means that the defendant acts with a more sophisticated level of awareness (Connecticut Jury Instructions No. 2.3-1, 2011).When you hold someone liable for an offense without considering the carelessness of the person then we refers to it strict liability. In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. Concurrence in the law is the requirement that a guilty mental state coincide with a guilty

Recent surveys have indicated that crime rate in the United States is on the rise. Crime in the U.S. is classified into property crime and violent crime. These criminal activities have a considerable impact on a state’s social and economic growth and development. Different states in the U.S. have developed different strategies to combat crime, which continues to transform in form and frequency. A number of policies, options, and approaches to crime control exist. This report explores some of the policies, options, and approaches that could be used by Florida to enhance crime control.

Mental State (Mens Rea) is indicated as a mental element of a defendant’s intent. This element is only necessary when a crime is voluntary or on purpose. Mens rea refers to a mental fault meaning the defendant's state of mind during the offense. Mens rea is the necessary component to prove if a criminal act has been committed.

Although the question of whether the offender’s conduct evoked fear in the victim is relevant, the focus for the “Intent” element is on the offender’s culpability, conduct, and purpose - - not the subjective perception or reaction of the victim. Steve Hoffman v. City of Montgomery, 863 So.2d 127, 130 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003).

A defendant can possess mens rea and still try to do the right thing. In the case of abuse, some parents and adult victims still try to seek medical attention for the injured party, while others flee or attempt to conceal the act. Where there is theft, there are defendants who attempt to return the merchandise, sometimes successful in avoiding prosecution and sometimes not, and so on. The presence of mens rea is not the sole guarantee of a conviction, however it is a very important part, and can determine case value almost immediately. It can also, as stated previously, give insight to a defense as well as project the application of sentencing guidelines and plea agreements to be

When looking at the Model Penal Code to determine that actions if produced the death of a person that meet the elements of murder they must show the actions of the criminal behavior, the mental status of the criminal conduct, and the circumstances surrounding the events (Child, 2014). The first requirement of the Model Penal Code is that of the actus reus, also known as the criminal actions of a person, this element indicates the guilt of the offender meaning that they knowingly and willingly committed the offense of murder, due to the actions that they took (Brody, 2010). The second element of the Model Penal Code is the mens rea, the mental aspect of knowing that the actions would result in the death of a person (Child, 2014). This meaning

Mens Rea: The act must be accompanied by a particular state of mind. Mens rea does not equate to intentionality. For example, your neighbor’s dog barks incessantly causing her to want to cause harm to the animal. One day, she shoots the dog with the intent to kill it thus eliminating the cause of her stress which was the incessant barking. The Model Penal Code drafters made it clear that different kinds of mens rea could be attached to different components of a crime (Sampsell-Jones, 2013, p. 1458). The drafters changed the word intent and replaced it with ‘purposefully’.

As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.

In studying crimes and deviance, sociologists look to explain what types of behavior are defined as deviant as opposed to criminal, who defines deviant behaviors, why people become deviant, and how society deals with deviant behavior. Deviance is defined by sociologists are behavior that significantly goes against expected rules and norms. Criminal behavior is behavior that violates the law. Sociology studies groups as opposed to individuals, so when studying crime and deviance, sociologists are looking at the factors that influence groups as a whole to engage in crime and deviant behavior. In defining deviant behavior, the definition may vary throughout different groups. Not all groups of people will consider the same behaviors

There are many perceptions of what defines crime. The definitions appear to change throughout history and are still changing today (Henry, S. and Lanier, M. M., 2001 ,p.139). For example, in the past marital rape was not considered a crime as it was thought that women were believed to be “sexual property” of the male and, therefore it couldn’t be classed as rape (Brownmiller, 1975, cited by Bergen, R.K., 1996, p.3). However, in the United States in 1978 a man was convicted of rape on his wife (Russell, 1990, cited by Bergen, R.K., 1996, p.4). This shows how it is hard to define crime due to the changes in views over time. Different cultures also have different perceptions of what is, or is not considered to be a crime. For example,