Mens Rea Case Study

If someone you knew was injured or killed after being struck by a car ,who would you blame? Many people, including the victim, friends and family of the victim, and the general public, would blame the driver even without having all of the details. Although the driver was the one behind the wheel of the vehicle involved in the accident, it doesn 't necessarily mean they are responsible; there 's always more to the story. Pluto, with a history of fainting, was driving the car that killed an elderly man and injured five school children. At first glance, it may seem like Pluto is at fault for the accident and should be punished accordingly, but if we take a closer look it is evident that it is not that simple. In order for the accused to be convicted

This can be answered by means of the two types of mens rea requirements: subjective and objective. If the accused knowingly chose to commit the crime then the mens rea would be considered subjective. Pluto was unaware of his condition, which caused him to faint, at the time of the accident so there is reason to believe he did not have any intent on committing this horrific crime. The objective mens rea looks at the incident from the perspective of a reasonable person. Due to the fact that Pluto had experienced fainting spells previous to the accident, some may say that he neglected to look into the reason behind these spells. They also may say that a reasonable person would have went to the doctor, to determine whether or not they are at risk of it happening again, before something serious happened. I personally believe that a reasonable person would brush off the occasional fainting spell and blame the spells on things such as not eating enough or being dehydrated. Thus, there is no evidence of a guilty mind and the mens rea of the incident cannot be proved. Pluto did not have the wrongful intention of killing the man and injuring the