Case law has recognised that a defendant may 'intend' a result because it is the purpose of his act.'The golden rule should be that, when directing a jury on the mental element necessary in a crime of specific intent, the judge should avoid any elaboration or paraphrase of what it meant by intent, and leave it to the jury's good sense to decide whether the accused acted with necessary intent, unless the judge is convinced that, on the facts and having regard to the way the case has been presented to the jury in evidence and argument, some further elaboration is strictly necessary to avoid misunderstanding.'
status | not read | reprioritisations | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
last reprioritisation on | suggested re-reading day | |||
started reading on | finished reading on |