Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Consider why and in what circumstances the courts recognise the existence of crimes of strict and absolute liability.
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Wed Feb 04 2004
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
"Strict Liability offences are contrary to fundamental legal principle. The imposition of criminal liability without reference to the state of mind of the accused can never be justified" Consider why and in what circumstances the courts recognise the existence of crimes of strict and absolute liability. Strict liability offences require no Mens Rea, the defendant can be found guilty of committing the crime by doing the forbidden conduct, the Actus Reus. The need to prove the Mens Rea has been removed by the parliament and courts due to the fact that there is a greater benefit to the public as whole. Most Strict Liability Offences are statutory offences created by parliament, although as an exception there are two common law offences covered by strict liability which are Public Nuisance and Blasphemous libel. Strict Liability was developed to regulate people's behaviour/conduct which affected other people's health & safety, food hygiene, road use, work...
To see the full version of this document, and 145,348 others
