R. V. Charemski Case Study

analytical Essay
1289 words
1289 words

Case Studies (Textbook pg. #129-131)

R. v. Martineau
Men rea is used in determining whether an act is considered a crime, and is applied to an act if there is indication that the act was committed with intent or knowledge or a degree of recklessness. The mens era of murder is having malice intentions prior to killing someone, so the person has an intent to murder. The argument that helps support that Martineau did not have the mens rea for murder, is the fact that he did not shoot the couple, and instead it was his friend Tremblay who had fried the pellet pistol. Martineau cannot be held accountable since he had no malice intentions to kill the couple, his intentions were strictly centred with the break and enter, there is no evidence …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Defines provocation as the actions taken or speech made to deliberately annoy or anger someone. provocation is applied to law when an individual loses control and commits a violent crime.
  • Argues that martineau did not have the mens rea for murder, since he had no malice intentions or a motive to kill the couple.
  • Explains subjective foresight refers to the issue of mens rea or intent. the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had intent of their crimes.
  • Explains that in criminal law, causation is the connection of conduct and physiological behaviour with a resulting effect. the supreme court upheld the court of appeal's decision to order new trial.
  • Compares the two cases of r. v. parent and thibert. both cases were different because of the circumstances and the accurate application of provocation.

This requires the prosecutor to contemplate and analyze the thought process and the psychological state of the person during the time of the crime. The conclusions of the motivation behind the accused actions is drawn from the evidence that is collected from the case. It also is a term used to refer to the removal of the stigma between murder and punishment, and the moral character of the accused.

R. v. Charemski
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.

Crown must prove the causation of death in order for the charge of murder to be made out. Since, without full awareness of the cause of the death the Crown will have no ability in deciding on to whom and what murder charge should be

Let Our AI Magic Supercharge Your Grades!

    Get Access