Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of criminal law
The role of criminal law
The role of criminal law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of criminal law
Week Two Complete
1. According Bohm & Haley (2012), the seven elements of crime are harm, legality, actus reus, mens rea, causation, concurrence, and punishment. All seven elements must be committed in order for an act to be considered a crime. Harm is considered the external consequence required to make an action a crime. Legality is the requirement that harm must be legally forbidden for the behavior to be a crime and that the law must not be retroactive. Intentional or criminal negligent actions or interactions that cause harm are considered actus reus. A guilty state of mind or criminal intent is referred to as mens rea. Causation is criminal harm leading to harm without a long delay. With concurrence, the criminal act and the criminal
…show more content…
In order for a law to be considered a “good” law, it must be composed of five features. According to Bohm & Haley (2012), the five features are politically, specificity, regularity, uniformity, and penal sanction. Politicality refers to the legitimacy of the source. In other words, only violations of rules made by the state, the political jurisdiction that enacted the laws, are crimes (Bohm & Haley 2012). Specificity refers to the scope of criminal law, and should provide strict definitions of specific acts. Regularity is the applicability of the criminal and how it relates to all people regardless of social status. Uniformity is the way criminal laws should be enforced upon anyone who violates them, regardless of social status. The punishment or threat to punish violators of laws by the state is called penal sanction (Bohm & Haley 2012). According to the reading, Megan’s law could potentially be considered a “bad” law. Reason being is because it is not a uniform law and in order to be considered a good law, it must have all five characteristics. The Megan’s law is on the federal level and all states have it, however, some of the stipulations of the law vary from state to state. For example, some states limit their information sharing about registered sex offenders to a passive notification approach, which involves the posting of information on the state’s registry site (CSOM, 2017). Megan’s law can be perceived as a good law; however, it could use some tweaking. The law should be made uniform across the entire country so that all states will have the same rules, as it relates to sex offenders. Sex offending is a serious crime that entails of stiff punishments. There should not be any secrets kept when it comes to the status of a sex offender. The goal should be to keep other individuals from falling victim to these
Causation is the cause of death, and in criminal law it is the connecting of conduct and physiological behaviour with a resulting effect, typically a serious injury or death. The analysis of the actus rea and mens read of the accused will assist the investigators in pinpointing the causation of the murder. In criminal law it is absolutely necessary to prove causation in order to convict an individual for first degree murder.
The term ‘Actus Reus’ is Latin, and translates to ‘the guilty act’ , it refers to the thing that the offender did that wa...
Megan's Law - Protection More Important than Privacy? In 1994, twice-convicted sex offender Jesse Timmendequas raped and murdered Megan Kanka, a seven-year old girl who lived across the street. In reaction to this emotionally-charged crime, Megan's home state of New Jersey ratified a community notification bill - dubbed "Megan's Law" - just three months later. This fall, a national version of the law went into effect, mandating that all fifty states notify citizens in writing of the presence of convicted sex offenders within their communities. Certainly, society has a responsibility to protect children from sexual offenders, and many feel that Megan's Law is the best course of action.
Sex offender notification laws have been among the most widely discussed and debated criminal justice policy issues in recent years. Numerous studies have been conducted on various views of sex offender notification laws. A vast majority of these studies have mixed research, some showing that sex offender notification laws are more beneficial than harmful and should continue, and others showing the exact opposite. Reasons such as public safety, the fear factor, and the hope for future recidivism to go down are some examples of why many believe that sex offender notification laws are beneficial to society. Others believe that such laws are a continuation of punishment for those who were convicted of a sex offense.
It is estimated that approximately 3% of the offenders who are currently incarcerated will likely commit another sexual-related crime upon release (Park & Lee, 2013, p. 26). There are several laws that have been in place regarding sexual offenses for decades, including Megan’s Law, which was enacted in 1996. The federal Megan’s Law establishes three specific conditions. The first condition required information from state sex offender registries to be distributed publicly so that all community citizens have access to it. The second condition requires any information collected by registration programs within the state to be released for any reason given that it is allowed under the state law.
In order to be convicted on a criminal charge, proof is required of three things; actus reus, mens rea and causation. The accused must have the criminal state of mind relevant to the crime he is accused of. Intention is a far more blameworthy aspect than recklessness,
Opposition however fights that though the intent of Megan’s Law is to protect the community, some states have published offender information where anyone can access. This access can lead to “witch hunts” by parents, students, etc. showing how the law has backfired (Repeal Adam Walsh Act Laws!).
Crime is some action/omission that causes harm in a situation that the person/group responsible ‘ought’ to be held accountable and punished irrespective of what the law book of state say.
With the rapid increase in crime rates, the defendants must act recklessly or intentionally to be held guilty. Crimes can be classified into two types of intents; general, and specific intent.
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
Sex offender legislation has become a controversial topic in the recent years. There have been numerous laws enacted in response to sex offender crime. Do these laws really work to help minimize re-offending, or do they give the public a false sense of security and cause recidivism? In a several studies researchers found no evidence of sex offender registries being effective in increasing public safety. Some studies have found that requiring sex offenders to register with law enforcement may significantly may reduce chances of recidivism. However, the research also found that making registry information available to the public may back fire and lead to higher levels of overall sex crimes
Some people might say that if a sex offender does their time in jail that is enough punishment. Others may disagree and say that more action needs to be taken because of stories like the little girl Megan Kanka, who was raped and killed by a sex offender. A sex offender who her parents were unaware of because there was no rule or law that stated anyone else needed to know. Soon after this incident happened, some states passed laws that required local communities to be notified when a convicted sexual offender moved to a specific area. These laws are different in every state. In some, the state requires that convicted sex offenders put up signs in the windows of their homes, so that the neighbors can be aware that a crime has been committed by that person. Some offenders are even required to send postcards to their neighbors, informing them of their crime. These specific states would like the neighbors to be aware of who is living near them. Almost as a “beware” so that they can take action by telling their children to stay away from the sex offenders. The internet also provides extremely convenient websites that allow users to locate addresses and photographs of the offender. The websites also include reasons why the offender was convicted. One of the reasons some say that the laws are too strict on sex offenders is because of people like the woman that actually lived with a sex offender. She was upset because she said he had already served his time and it was unfair to tell everyone in their neighborhood that he had committed that crime. Some of these offenders may constitute an unfair punishment, especially if they are the low-risk, one time offenders who have possibly learned their lesson the first time. It may be unfair becaus...
Martin, R. (1996). Pursuing Public Protection Through Mandatory Community Notification of Convicted Sex Offenders: The Trials and Tribulations of Megan's Law. The Boston Public Interest Law Journal, Vol. 6, Issue 29
Mens rea refers to the mental element involved in committing a crime and is concerned with the guilty mind of the defendant. Both intent and recklessness are categories of mens rea that are different and have different levels of culpability. Intention in criminal law is when an individual consciously decides to behave in a particular manner to achieve a certain desired result and in doing so commits a crime. It is the highest form of mens rea as someone who intentionally sets out to commit a criminal offence is typically more culpable then an individual who has behaved in a reckless manner, which has consequently resulted in a crime. Intention can be further split into two categories: direct intention and oblique intention.
To be criminally liable of any crime in the UK, a jury has to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the Actus Reus and the Mens Rea. The Actus Reus is the physical element of the crime; it is Latin for ‘guilty act’. The defendant’s act must be voluntary, for criminal liability to be proven. The Mens Rea is Latin for guilty mind; it is the most difficult to prove of the two. To be pronounced guilty of a crime, the Mens Rea requires that the defendant planned, his or her actions before enacting them. There are two types of Mens Rea; direct intention and oblique intention. Direct intention ‘corresponds with everyday definition of intention, and applies where the accused actually wants the result that occurs, and sets out to achieve it’ (Elliot & Quinn, 2010: 59). Oblique intention is when the ‘accused did not desire a particular result but in acting he or she did realise that it might occur’ (Elliot & Quinn, 2010: 60). I will illustrate, by using relevant case law, the difference between direct intention and oblique intention.