Why Is Not A Conviction?

Classify all of the individuals involved in this scenario as to whether they would be considered (if any) a principal, an accessory before the fact, or an accessory after the fact based upon a common-law analysis and explain your rationale for each decision.

Actus Reus - "the criminal act" [Latin, Guilty act.] is an element of criminal responsibility, that a person acts wrongful or includes the physical components of a crime. Criminal statutes generally need proofs of both actus reus and mens rea on the portion of a defendant in command to establish criminal obligation.

Actus Reus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea: An act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty. In the case of R. v. Pickton (2010), the Supreme Court of Canada convicts serial killer Robert Pickton of second degree murder and demonstrates that even if an individual was not the sole perpetrator of a crime, they are still held equally liable for the crime as long as they are an active participant or otherwise abetted the misconduct. The Supreme Courts made the correct decision in dismissing Pickton’s appeal.

Wrongful convictions are common in the court-system. In fact, wrongful convictions are not the rare events that you see or hear on televisions shows, but are very common. They stem from some sort of systematic defect that lead to wrongful convictions such as, eyewitness misidentification testimony, unvalidated or improper forensic science, false confessions and incriminating statements, DNA lab errors, false confessions, and informants (2014). Bringing awareness to all these systematic defects, which result in wrongful, is important because it will better adjust the system to avoid making the same mistakes with future cases. However, false confession is not a systematic defect. It does not occur because files were misplaced or a lab technician put one too many drops. False confessions occur because of some of psychological attempt to protect oneself and their family. Thus, the courts responsibility should be to reduce these false confessions.

What does the prosecution need to prove in the courtroom for a person to be convicted of a criminal offence? (2 marks)

3. For a crime to be committed, the prosecutor must be able to prove a criminal intent and an overt act to carry out that intent. Jack and Mary agreed to rob a series of banks. Prior to beginning their bank robbery spree, they were arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy. What act did Jack and Mary do that justifies a finding that they committed the crime? Explain.

c) Offer acceptable reasons for the crime (e.g. didn’t mean to; was intoxicated; was an accident)

Actus Reus is the physical act of the crime why the defendant did what they did? Referring back to murder the defendant could have unlawfully kill someone if they had a bad intention but if the defendant did it for self defence then it is not classed as unlawful. Omissions as Actus Reus is killing the victim e.g. stabbing them, running them over, shooting them etc. the natural rule of omission cant actually make the defendant guilty of the act he has committed. This was told by Stephen J, a 19th century judge in the following way and I quote “A sees B drowning and is able t save him by holding out his hand. An abstains from doing so in order that B may be drowned. A has committed no offence” an omission is only agreeable for the Actus Reus, where there is a duty to act. There are four important positions in which such duty can exist.

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’.

Actus reus is split into different category’s with each one representing a different form of it these categories are as follows, causation, this is what the offense caused for example the actus reus of Murder would be somebody dyeing as a result of the defendants behaviour.

Actus reus is either a specific action or in some cases the absence of action.

It protects and secures diplomats who take security together with other countries and the laws of the country

Everyone has convictions, whether they even know it or not. Convictions can be evident in any viewpoint or thought that a person or persons have or believe in. These views and beliefs can be garnered by the individual or instilled by others throughout life and can have either a positive or a negative impact on others and us. Dr. Steven Riser (2004) wrote that, “Having convictions is being so thoroughly convinced that something is absolutely true that you take a stand for it regardless of the consequences” (para. 9). In fact, through our views and beliefs, we establish and form our convictions and we shape ourselves. This paper will discuss the following:

This paper provides an understanding of the different ingredients of actus reus in criminal law. It covers relevant literature as well as analyzes case law on the concept.