Mens Rea introduction and direct intention
Case name Case detail Point of law
R v Cox D injected V with ‘good’ motive of ending suferingg D convicted as intent is not the same as motiveg
R v Esop N/A Ignorance of the law is no defenceg
R v Mohan N/A Direct intention = ordinary meaning = ‘D’s aim or purpose’
Indirect intention (in order from oldest to newest)
Case name Test
Hyam Was it a ‘high probability’?
Moloney Was it a ‘natural consequence’?
Hancock and Was it a ‘natural and probable consequence’?
Shankland
Nedrick Was it a ‘virtual certainty’?
Woolin 1) Was the result D’s aim or purpose? (If yes – direct intent)
2) A) Was the result virtually certain; and
(Current law) B) Did D appreciate that this result was virtually certain?
If so, the jury are entitled to fnd intentg
Transferred malice
Case name Point of law
R v Mitchell Transferred malice is the transfer of mens rea from one
R v Latimer person/object to anotherg These are case examplesg
R v Pembleton The mens rea requirement must be the same so cannot
generally be transferred between ofences
AgGg Reference 1) Mens Rea cannot be transferred twice
(no3 of 1994) 2) Not needed in cases of mistaken identity or ‘general
malice’g
Case name Case detail Point of law
R v Cox D injected V with ‘good’ motive of ending suferingg D convicted as intent is not the same as motiveg
R v Esop N/A Ignorance of the law is no defenceg
R v Mohan N/A Direct intention = ordinary meaning = ‘D’s aim or purpose’
Indirect intention (in order from oldest to newest)
Case name Test
Hyam Was it a ‘high probability’?
Moloney Was it a ‘natural consequence’?
Hancock and Was it a ‘natural and probable consequence’?
Shankland
Nedrick Was it a ‘virtual certainty’?
Woolin 1) Was the result D’s aim or purpose? (If yes – direct intent)
2) A) Was the result virtually certain; and
(Current law) B) Did D appreciate that this result was virtually certain?
If so, the jury are entitled to fnd intentg
Transferred malice
Case name Point of law
R v Mitchell Transferred malice is the transfer of mens rea from one
R v Latimer person/object to anotherg These are case examplesg
R v Pembleton The mens rea requirement must be the same so cannot
generally be transferred between ofences
AgGg Reference 1) Mens Rea cannot be transferred twice
(no3 of 1994) 2) Not needed in cases of mistaken identity or ‘general
malice’g
