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

A crime in English Law and Canadian Law - Essay ExampleThese two elements are actus reus and mens rea. It is important to placard that concurrence of these two elements is mandatory to prove any offence. While existence of these two elements is common in English and Canadian constabularys, there are some(prenominal) major differences when it comes to their interpretation in these two laws. In order to analyze definition of crime in English and Canadian laws, developing rendering of actus reus and mens rea is imperative. thither are varied definitions of crime present in different national and international laws. However, the most recurrent definition is given by Blackburn (1993, p. 5) which defines crime to be acts attracting legal punishment that are injurious in some way to the community at large or one or more race within it. Another Canadian version of this definition is provided by Tappan (1960) which defines crime as an intentional act or omission in violation of sinful 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 broadside 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 sinful 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 barbarous law prevailing in the state voluntarily and with guilty mind (actus reus and mens rea respectively). Both laws also presume innocence 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 vile law, actus Reus and mens rea form the main elements of law. Omission of intent is a third element which is referred to as strict liability. However, in many cases, the criminal intentions are not inevitable 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 instead 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 Canadian version of criminal law and other p arts 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 taken place or its consequences. Hence, the act has to be voluntary and willfully committed in order to fulfill the condition 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