A crime in English Law and Canadian Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

A crime in face Law and Canadian Law - Essay patternThese two elements are strikeus reus and mens rea. It is important to note that concurrence of these two elements is mandatory to prove any offence. time existence of these two elements is common in English and Canadian rectitudes, there are some study differences when it comes to their interpretation in these two equitys. In order to read definition of crime in English and Canadian righteousnesss, developing understanding of actus reus and mens rea is imperative. There are varied definitions of crime present in antithetic national and international laws. However, the most recurrent definition is given by Blackburn (1993, p. 5) which defines crime to be acts attracting ratified punishment that are injurious in some way to the community at large or one or more people within it. An some other Canadian magnetic variation of this definition is provided by Tappan (1960) which defines crime as an intentional act or omission in violation of felon law (statutory or case law), committed without defense or justification, and sanctioned by the state as a felony or misdemeanor (Haggan, 2011). It is important to note that a crime will only be considered as committed if there is actus reus (guilty act carried out voluntarily) and mens rea (guilty mind leading to intention of committing the act) (Boyd, 2010). Therefore, mens rea and actus reus are the major elements of criminal law. Hence, a crime is a breach of rules defined by the state or any other governing authority. Most of the crimes are considered as offences against the state and community. The definition of crime under Canadian law is relatively similar to the one prevailing in English law. Therefore, the crime occurs when an individual breaches criminal law prevailing in the state voluntarily and with guilty mind (actus reus and mens rea respectively). Both laws also presume whiteness of the accused until unless proven guilty. However, Canadian law levies burden of proof on the crown counsel in Canada (Boyd, 2010). There is also slight variation in the elements of these two laws. In English criminal law, actus Reus and mens rea pattern the main elements of law. Omission of intent is a third element which is referred to as strict liability. However, in many a(prenominal) cases, the criminal intentions are not required to be shown. In such cases, strict liability is applied. On the other hand, elements of Canadian criminal law includes actus reus, mens rea, special circumstances leading to incomplete offences, aiding and assisting in crime (Boyd, 2010). As far as criminal liability is concerned, it forms part of product liability law preferably of criminal law. In order to understand differences between these two major elements of criminal law, it is important to analyze how English and Canadian laws consider actus reus and mens rea individually. The origin for actus reus and mens rea is English law and it is adapted in Cana dian version of criminal law and other parts of the world as well. Actus Reus itself is a Latin for guilty act and is considered as mandatory criterion for criminal offence. It is important to note that actus reus defines all the elements of an offence other than mens rea which defines ones state of mind. Actus Reus severity is defined by circumstances in which the offence has stopn come on or its consequences. Hence, the act has to be voluntary and willfully committed in order to fulfill the discipline of Actus Reus. There are four types of crimes on the basis of actus Reus which are actions crimes i.e. conduct, state of affairs crimes, result crimes and omission. Actions crimes take place when the consequences of the acts are immaterial. State of affairs