Principles of criminal liability Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Principles of criminal liability - Term Paper Example The rule that says that the prosecutor has to prove every element of the principles beyond reasonable doubt is called â€Å"corpus delicti rule† (Hall, 2011). When a crime is committed, it is said to have some elements that directly show how and why the crime has been committed in a broad view. These elements may include the presence of a mental state, a prohibited action and a lack of legal justification. These elements should be proven by the prosecutor beyond reasonable doubt and in the cases where these elements are not proven, the person who is charged of the crime should be charged not guilty. The principles are mens rea, actus reus, concordance and causation. These principles are related to one another in a significant way as if one doesn’t satisfy, then it can change the whole scenario, and thus all should collectively apply on the crime (Lanser and  Bloy, 2000). Mens rea Mens rea is the Latin word for â€Å"guilty mind†. This is an element which shows that every crime is convicted in a state of mind. It is the state of mind of the defendant when he is or has committed the prohibited act of crime. In the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code, the primary source used to define mens rea sets four standards. These standards suggest that the guilty mind can be attributed to those individuals who commit crimes â€Å"purposely†, â€Å"knowingly†, â€Å"recklessly†, or â€Å"negligently†. There have been developed statutes that provide more to the definition of these elements and they specify which mental states apply to which particular crimes (Hall, 2005). When an individual knows that his act will cause an expected negative result, it is â€Å"purposely†. When he commits an act being aware that his conduct will be highly risky of causing a negative result, he acts â€Å"knowingly†. When he knows that the act is going to be risky and still disregards the existence of the unjustifiabl e risks associated with the act, he is said to act â€Å"recklessly†. Lastly, if the individual has totally deviated themselves from the standard of care that he has towards a reasonable person, so he has committed the act â€Å"negligently†. In the criminal law, mens rea is considered as one of the most important and necessary elements that have to be present at the time of a crime. The common law system made the rule that the liability applies on the criminal on the grounds that the act will not make a person guilty of charge until and unless his mind is also guilty. Thus, it is important that there should be actus reus where mens rea is present to make sure that the defendant is charged of the crime he committed. So it can be held that the person who committed a crime without being at mental fault is generally not criminally liable for that act (Hall, 2005). Mens rea is not required in civil law as a subjective element to prove liability, but if a tort or a contract is breached with wrong intention, that may be counted in the offence and it would increase the scope of the liability on the offender and the measure of damages may be increased that have to be paid to the plaintiff. Therefore, it is evident that the existence of mens rea allows the accompanying principle of the actus reus as well and is closely related to each other. Without the presence of any one, liability will not be imposed (Hall, 2011). The principle issues on which mens rea is applied hold many stages of development. Some issues are said to be