The rule of law and mens rea

Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 1 month ago to Culture
3 comments | Share | Flag

I had never heard of the term "mens rea" - which is loosely "criminal intent". This statute in Ohio would force intent to be considered when trying someone for a crime.

I'd appreciate a lawyer to weigh in here, as this sounds reasonable, but is not my particular area of expertise.

All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 1 month ago in reply to this comment.
    But to make an evaluation of "intent" on every crime would be to inject an "escape clause" to be used at the discretion of the individual/entity discerning said intent. I don't like it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 1 month ago in reply to this comment.
    I came to similar conclusions. I think there is a difference between an "honest mistake" and otherwise, but I also agree that the nature of some acts is such that education is the more appropriate correction.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 1 month ago
    I'm no lawyer, but it would seem that there are instances where intent would be appropriate, and others where it would be immaterial. Shoplifting for example - a person who absentmindedly places an item in a location that causes it not to be charged for would be one that would need to have a criminal intent proven. Whereas sex with a 10 yr old should be criminal on its very merit. Of course, intent requires capability to discern intent, so one who does not have that capability cannot derive intent.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo