Maxim: 1

"Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea."

An act does not make a person guilty, unless the mind is guilty.
Regina v Tolson [1889]
"Ordinarily speaking, a crime is not committed if the mind of the person doing the act in
question be innocent".
For criminal responsibility a person must have committed any prohibited act with mens-rea or
criminal intention. It is necessary to show that an individual actually:
1) Performed the actual crime, which is known as the actus reus and
2) That the act was intentional and purposeful, which is known as the mens rea
Fowler v. Padget (1798)
"It is a principle of natural justice, and of our law, that actus facit reum nisi mens sit rea. The
intent and the Act must both concur to constitute the crime."
Mens rea

There are four different types of mens rea. These are:

1. The intentional mens rea means that the offender took purposeful action to achieve his goal.
2. The knowing mens rea means that an offender takes action knowing that the criminal activity
will be the result of his actions
3. The reckless mens rea occurs when an offender makes a decision to engage in behavior even
though he is aware of the risks involved (Driving while drunk)
4. The negligent mens rea, sometimes called criminal negligence, when a person simply fails to
appreciate the risks of harm.

Hyam v DPP [1975] AC 55 at 79

In that case, D who was the lover of J, became suspicious of his relationship with B. She went to
B's house, poured petrol through the letter-box, and lit it, causing a serious fire. B's two
daughters died in the fire, and D was charged with murder. Her defense was that she intended
only to frighten B and had not intended to kill anyone. She was convicted of murder. Lord
Hailsham LC said it was sufficient for murder that D knew there was ‘a serious risk of death or
grievous bodily harm’ and went on to commit the acts with the intention of exposing a potential
victim to such a risk and all agreed that foresight was as good as intention.
Intention vs. Motive
One has to understand the distinction between intention and motive.
Intention refers to a purposeful action and Motive refers to the ultimate cause.
A robber robs a person to purchase liquor for himself. “Robbing” is the “immediate act” and this
immediate act is called “intention.” “To purchase wine” is called “Motive”. It is possible that
intention of any act is criminal but motive is good.
Emperor vs. Raghunatha Rai (1892)
Some Hindus forcibly removed two cows from a Mohammedan to save them from slaughter in
view of their religious beliefs and worship for cows. Their object and motive were good
according to their religion.
Intention is relevant in criminal and civil liability but does not concern with good motives.