Hi, I was wondering if anyone could offer me some insight as to if not enough evidence is given, how do we determine the "Mens Rea"? If there is no sufficient evidence to prove anything about the Mens Rea, doesn't the defendant have to be proven not guilty? Just a bit curious.
Depending on the scenario use the "reasonable person" test Muen. Remember in the first mini-case we decided that a reasonable person would know or should know that stabbing someone in the abdomen or "trunk" where there are many vital organs, could cause death and that would be enough to determine the mens era under the criminal code wording on your handout. If you don't think there is enough possible evidence to support the mens rea or if you accept the possible defence offered / inferred from the text, then you would have to acquit (find not guilty) as it is the Crowns burden to prove the case and not the defendant's duty to disprove. Insufficient evidence typically means the Crown has not met their burden and the verdict would be "Not Guilty." I hope this clears it up some.
ReplyDeleteAh, yes, much appreciated. Thanks
ReplyDelete