Introduction

Criminal law refers to the law body which relates to crime. It is this law that is responsible for the regulation of social conduct and proscription of harming, threatening or endangering the safety, health and moral welfare of people. Therefore, it is a body whose importance cannot be doubted at all. This is because it is part of our lives. This essay has looked to cover various issues, with regard to criminal law.

Feasibility Of A Conviction For A Suspect Without Means Rea But Engaged In Actus Rea

According to the globally accepted definition, the legal term mens rea means, an element of criminal responsibility, a guilt mind, a guilty or wrongful purpose. Basically it is what we may call guilty knowledge and willfulness. Actus rea on the other hand is the criminal act itself. In criminal law, these two are considered to be separate entities. Each of them has a separate implication in the influence that it causes in the court.

Basically, in criminal law, a crime consists of both a mental and physical involvement. Said in other word an intent of crime may not qualify to be termed as criminal if visibility so to call it of the physical aspect of the crime is lacking. But going back to the 1600s, only then can we really support I have made in the statement before this, since the meaning of such true criminal act is currently marked on basis of whether it is voluntary or involuntary.

A person suffering any mental complication, a person in duress, or one who has lived in total seclusion or exclusion from the masses, may be open to an array of abnormalities once exposed to the people. Normal people if I may so call them. Lets begin with any one in duress, he or she may act to meet the limitations or desires of whoever is putting him or her in the status we are talking about and proceed to commit massive unacceptables, to even him or herself for the sake of for instance saving his or her life.

The same case will appear to anyone who has lived in total seclusion from the masses, any act they do especially for beginners may be purely experimental and such therefore will stand not guilty since they are clearly the opposite of the topic in discussion. An individual with mental challenge on the other hand has a mental decision making arrangement alien to any normalcy. It is above even medical expertise to substantiate the reason behind the actus reus of a mad man. Therefore the connection of the few individuals intentions to do something and the final deed does not actualize and the three therefore stand as the best examples for the mens rea and actus rea I am supposed to discuss.

Read also: "Expert Help with Article Critique Writing"

Diplomatic Immunity and Legislative Immunity

The distinction between diplomatic and legislation immunity extends beyond the definitions. Diplomatic immunity for instance is established along international principles aimed at advancing the privilege of against legal action to diplomats working in a particular host country away from their own. According to the legal dictionary, legislative immunity is a doctrine that prevents legislators from being sued for actions done and decisions made in the course of serving in government. The limits of immunity do not protect the legislators from criminal prosecution, nor does it relieve them off the responsibility of their actions outside the scope of their office. In the former, the scope of limit goes not beyond the definition above attempted and therefore it acts not as a license for the diplomats to commit crimes, only that it gives them the option of living in a country without having to know its rules.

This however does not allow them to break such rules in the name of they do not know them. This therefore tells that any one on legal immunity may make a decision not deemed correct within the legal framework that outs to do so and not be taken liable for the simple reason that their duty as an official within any such jurisdiction allowed them while a diplomat may have to answer to questions of liability if they partake an action advised by similar motives as the legislature.

My honest view however is that diplomatic immunity serves a tool to add on to the special citizens, a true blow to the equality agenda of the people of America. Americans abroad in my view therefore do not need this privilege at all. If getting will seclude them from the true interaction with the people of the host nations, how will they achieve to infect them with the American agenda How will the point of equality and being a brothers and sisters keeper make sense to a person who cant share with you the simple legal loyalty put in place by the great men and women of the host country?

Theory of courts holding defendants of questionable competency to the standard sentencing guidelines

Any court should hold a defendant of questionable competency to the standard sentencing guidelines. The argument around here will be the degree to which the competence of the defendant is questionable. It would also attract the comparison of safety of the state or the people to whom the individual is going to be exposed to incase the sentencing is avoided or overlooked. Another point of argument would be, what picture the court shall be sending especially to those who would risk faking the condition we are talking about for the purpose of putting the law to the test. First, the degree to which we question the level of competency is key. It is worth noting that if the level of the perpetrators competence provides a visible connection between his or her mens rea and actus rea, a sentencing against them should be the minimum penalty the deeds of this person should attract.

Second, if the safety of the people, the integrity of the court shall be comprised by the deeds of the person at present and in the future, its only fair to protect especially the later, not ignoring the former for purposes of both image and states security. Lastly, the proof of competence amongst individuals can only be determined by above experience, medical reporting. It is a challenge to any medical attempts especially when an individual decides to fake their position of competence. To avoid any such practices, the court need stand out and deal with the above persons for purposes of maintaining sanity amongst the population.

Goals of Criminal Law

There are several objectives that are attached to criminal law. The first goal is retribution. By default, criminals should suffer in a way, owing to the fact that they were involved in committing a crime. After conviction, the law courts conclude that a suspect has caused unpleasant disadvantages to other people. As much as criminal justice should try to rectify their behavior, the suspects should also be put through some unpleasant disadvantage. For example, people submit to the law and reserve their rights not to be killed. However, someone may come along and commit a murder on them. When this happens, this murderer may also be executed. Therefore, it is similar to the righting the balance theory. A counter action is carried out to make up for one that had occurred before.

The other goal of criminal law is deterrence. To start with, individual deterrence is directed to the individual offender. After the offender has committed a crime, there is a need to ensure that they do not commit it again. This is achieved by the issuing of a punishment that is suitable for the crime committed. The sentencing is carried out in such a way that it discourages the offender from getting involved in such an act again. However, deterrence is not only meant for individuals. Instead, it is meant for the world at large. The sentence of one person only functions as an example to the rest of the members of the society.

The third goal of criminal law is incapacitation. This is whereby; the individual is separated from the society. The major aim of this is to protect the society from the misconduct of the offender. The major way in which this is carried out is through prison sentences. These ensure that the offenders are placed away from the outside world. Other ways in which the same can be achieved is through banishment or the death penalty. Their aim is also to separate the offender from the society and ensure that people are safe from their misconduct.

The last goal of criminal law to be reviewed in this essay is rehabilitation. This refers to the transformation of the offender to a respectable and better member of the society. It adds value to the person who was initially considered to be a law breaker. However, this may take some time. This is because the process involves starting by convincing the offender that he/she was wrong. This way, further offence can be prevented. Prisons also serve this purpose, in which the prisoners are taught on how to be better and useful members of the society.

Conclusion

The essay above has clarified various phenomena in criminal law. It can be used as a tool for solving controversial issues that might occur in criminal law. These are issues that make sense in the lives of people who find themselves in positions that are not adjacent with the law. The essay also provides an overview on the objectives of criminal law and its areas of application. This provides more insight to the reader concerning the topic.

Related essays