The Elements of a CrimeLaw 120 Essential Outcome

-identify and explain the elements of a

criminal offence and of selected specific

offences

The Elements of a Crime

Two conditions must exist for an act to be a criminal offence: actus reus and mens rea. In Latin, actus reus means “wrongful deed.” It must be show that the person committed the act prohibited by law.

Mens rea means “guilty mind.” It must also be shown that the accused intended to commit the offence.

These two conditions must exist at the same time.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and

Freedoms states that an individual is

innocent until proven guilty. The Crown

attorney must prove that actus reus and

mens rea existed at the time the crime was

committed.

These conditions must be proven beyond a

reasonable doubt. If there is a reasonable

doubt in the mind of the judge or jury that the

accused committed the crime, the accused

will be acquitted and set free.

Actus Reus

The Criminal Code explains what mustoccur for an act to be considered acrime. The Actus Reus is the physicalact of the crime.

Mens Rea

Mens Rea is the second condition thatmust exist for an act to be considered acrime. This condition is the mental partof a crime. Mens rea exists if theoffence is committed with intent orknowledge.

1) Intent – the true purpose of the act. It isbased on the facts and on what a reasonableperson would be thinking under thecircumstances.◦ Intent can be either general or specific

◦ A general intent to perform an action means thatthe intent is limited to the act itself and the personhas no other criminal purpose in mind.

◦ Specific Intent exists when the personcommitting the offence has a further criminalpurpose in mind.

The law considers some people to beincapable of forming the intent necessary tocommit a crime. I.E. Mental illness, minors,people extremely under the influence ofdrugs/alcohol

2) Knowledge – knowing certain facts can alsoprovide the necessary mens rea. For example, anyperson who uses a credit card knowing that it hasbeen revoked or cancelled is guilty of an indictableoffence. Here the Crown only has to prove theindividual used the card knowing that it had beencancelled.

Motive

The reason for committing an offence is called themotive. Motive is not the same as intent, and itdoes not establish the guilt of the accused. A personcan have a motive and not commit the offence.

Motive may be used as circumstantial evidence –indirect evidence that would lead you to concludethat someone is guilty. However, the elements ofthe crime must be proven to obtain the conviction.The judge may also refer to the motive for anoffence during sentencing.

Recklessness

The careless disregard for the possible results of an action. When people commit acts with recklessness, they may not intend to hurt anyone. However, they understand the risks of their actions and proceed to act anyway.

◦ i.e. Driving over the speed limit, cutting people off in traffic could result in criminal charges if injury occurs as a result of these actions. Mens Rea would exist if such recklessness were proven.

the person committed the actus reus, he or she is guilty, no matter what precautions were taken to avoid committing the offence.

Offences without Mens Rea

Some offences are less serious that those found inthe Criminal Code. To prove that these offencesoccurred, it is not necessary to prove mens rea.

These offences are usually violations of federal orprovincial regulations passed to protect the public.Speeding, “short-weighting” a package of food, andpolluting the environment are all examples ofregulatory offences.

Regulatory offences also carry lesser penalties. Asa result, they do not carry the stigma attached with acriminal conviction.

There are two types of regulatory

offences: strict liability offences and

absolute liability offences.

To prove a strict liability offence, it is

only necessary to prove that the

offence was committed. The accused

can put forward the defence of due

diligence, which means that the

accused took reasonable care not to

commit the offence or honestly believed

in a mistaken set of facts.

Absolute liability offences are similar to strict

liability offences in that the Crown does not

have to prove mens rea.

However, absolute liability offences have no

possible defence –due diligence is not

accepted as a defence for committing such

offences.

If the person committed the actus reus, he or

she is guilty, no matter what precautions

were taken to avoid committing the offence.