Murder Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Murder - Essay Example However, it is a fact in criminal law, that the â€Å"criminal intent† or the â€Å"mens rea† of the offender to be convicted for the commission of any of the crimes under the Code requires a different degree of culpability which is dependent on the nature of the crime. Hence, the elements of these two crimes are to be treated differently. The issue that presented before us now that needs to be resolved is: The Mens rea for murder is too narrow in certain respects and too wide in others. The fault element for involuntary manslaughter is simply too wide. To differentiate these two crimes, first thing that needs to be done is to identify the elements for the commission of each of the crimes. We start with the crime of Murder. Alan W. Norrie has reported that for the crime of murder, the case of R. V. Woolin 1 should be highlighted as the basis of defining the intention of the accused. â€Å"In this case, the House has rejected the conclusion of the Court of Appeal that f oresight of a substantial risk of death or serious bodily harm could in certain circumstances be an â€Å"alternative mens rea† that can quality to intention of the accused†. While in the case of R. V. ... However, there exists a conflict in the Woolin case which leaves the test for the criminal intention too specific. In the event that in the future a crime of murder is committed, the victim or his family shall be prejudiced by the conviction of the criminal to a lesser offence, carrying with it a lesser penalty because of non-compliance with the attendant circumstances as stated in the Woolin case, to make him liable for murder. Thus, it gives the criminal the privilege to demand for a lesser penalty and escape a portion of the imprisonment. Moreover, there are two issues which are left unanswered by the Woolin case, which concern the moral basis for convicting a criminal for murder. In one, the foresight of virtual certainty may be regarded as morally under-inclusive, while in the other, it is over-inclusive. These problems, relating to issues of good and bad motive, originated from the unstable moral core at the heart of mens rea, which the dominant subjectivist approach ignores at its peril.5 The principle laid down by Woolin case caused quite a stir because foreseeability and intention are the elements used to prove the degree of culpability of the offender. The terms â€Å"direct† and â€Å"indirect intention† are given their conservative meanings of â€Å"purpose, aim or object† and â€Å"necessary means to an end or side-effect foreseen as virtually certain to occur whether desired or not†. The argument of Norrie is that in the â€Å"process of legal and moral judgment in the criminal law, these terms cannot be fully separated from broader issues of â€Å"motive† or â€Å"ulterior intention†, understood as the moral backdrop to the intentions that are formed, and generally seen as irrelevant to culpability†6. Therefore, if the