Preview

bacteria and pyrokrates

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
445 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
bacteria and pyrokrates
Yannelly De Leon
General Intent vs. Specific Intent “Intent: A determination to perform a particular act or to act in a particular manner for a specific reason; an aim or design; a resolution to use a certain means to reach an end.” [1] The difference between General Intent vs. Specific Intent is when the defendant commits a crime with a specific end in mind and general intent is when a defendant commits a crime with no specific result in mind. General intent crime includes but is not limited to crimes such as manslaughter, negligent homicide, arson and rape. In a general intent crime it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended the precise harm or the precise result that occurred. For example if you commit involuntary manslaughter because you ran over a person or had an accident while driving under the influence and killed someone, it is not necessary to prove that you intended to kill someone but just the sole fact that you decided to drive under the influence and therefore committed the crime you are convicted of involuntary manslaughter. [2] However specific intent crimes include but are not limited to murder, attempt, conspiracy, solicitation, larceny and false imprisonment. When a defendant commits one of these crimes that defendant thought things through and is aware of each outcome for each crime committed. For example attempted murder requires a specific intent to kill, even though murder may require a lesser intent. [3] When a defendant commits murder that is a specific intent crime because the defendant knew that there was a very high risk of death or grievous bodily injury. [4] In conclusion the difference between general and specific intent is the defendants’ intentions before committing the crime. If the defendant was reckless and negligent then it will be a general intent crime because he didn’t plan the outcome before committing the crime but he still committed it. However if the defendant



Cited: 1. Burton’s Legal Thesaurus, 2007, Burton C. William: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/intent 2. General Intent vs. Specific Intent, 05 May 2012, Author unknown: http://www.miblaw.com/lawschool/general-intent-vs-specific-intent/ 3. Brookhart G. Daniel, Criminal Law Deskbook “Crimes and Defenses”, Volume II Charlottesville, Virginia 2010, page 2-1. 4. Specific and General Intent Crimes Lawyers, 09 September 2013, LaMance Ken: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/specific-and-general-intent-crimes.html

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Farmer V Pilot

    • 1685 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The concept of 'intention' does not require that Defendant (D) know that his/her act will cause harm to the Plaintiff (P), but must know with substantial certainty that their act will result in certain outcomes (landing of the plane on the P’s land).…

    • 1685 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    LA 245 Study Guide

    • 6344 Words
    • 24 Pages

    Intentional torts: harm caused by deliberate action. Ex: newspaper columnist who wrongly accuses someone of being a drunk has committed intentional torts…

    • 6344 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    To commit an intentional tort, one person must intend to harm a certain other person.…

    • 4685 Words
    • 31 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    a. Mere intentions do not make a criminal offence – there must be a criminal act or omission…

    • 991 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    another person or intent to inflict an injury likely to cause death in order to establish…

    • 1075 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Negligence on the other hand happens when harm or damage occur without intention, an example is someone who disobeys traffic laws and they result in an accident. While they were breaking the law, they did not intentionally mean for the accident to occur.…

    • 672 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tort Outline

    • 9959 Words
    • 40 Pages

    1) Introduction a) Definition – A tort is a civil wrong, other than breach of contract, for which the law provides a remedy. A person who breaches a tort duty (i.e., a duty to act in a manner that will not injure another person) has committed a tort and may be liable in a lawsuit brought by a person injured because of that tort. Torts is a fault-based system. b) Purposes of tort law: (1) to provide a peaceful means for adjusting the rights of parties who might otherwise “take the law into their own hands”; (2) to deter wrongful action; (3) to encourage socially responsible behavior; and, (4) to restore injured parties to their original condition, insofar as the law can do this, by compensating them for their injury. 2) Intentional Torts a) Assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to chattels, and trespass to land. b) Intent i) Meaning of intent: There is no general meaning of “intent” when discussing intentional torts. For each individual tort, you have to memorize a different definition of “intent.” All that the intentional torts have in common is that D must have intended to bring about some sort of physical or mental effect upon another person. (1) No intent to harm: The intentional torts are generally not defined in such a way as to require D to have intended to harm the plaintiff. (Example: D points a water gun at P, making it seem like a robbery, when in fact it is a practical joke. If D has intended to put P in fear of imminent harmful bodily contact, the intent for assault…

    • 9959 Words
    • 40 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The doctrine of transferred intent is acting with the purpose or intent to do harm to a specific individual yet, the intended target is not harmed but another bystander is harmed instead (General Elements of Crimes, 2010). An example of transferred intent would be the case that was in the news of an eleven (11) year old boy that was subsequently shot in the head as a result of transferred intent. Keon Malone was the eleven (11) year old that was an innocent bystander when he was shot while in his mother’s home through the door. Brandon Scott fired his weapon at the apartment next door to where Malone was, but the bullet did not hit his intended victim. As a result of Brandon Scotts’ recklessness, Keon Malone now has permanent mental and physical…

    • 244 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The person who has committed the acts must show that they knew they were the one who caused the crime and that knowingly were aware that their actions would cause a negative outcome. In society, we as a people must determine what we consider to be illegal and what the severity of those actions are and should be. State and federal laws are put into place when criminal law is acknowledged as an unacceptable way of society.…

    • 419 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Assault Vs Battery

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages

    For example, direct intention means a desire for result. So for assault, the test would be if the defendant desired to apprehend violence. An example of this is in the case of R v Ireland. This is where the defendant terrorised the victim, who suffered psychiatric injury with silent phone calls. Whereas, for battery, the test is objective. In the case R v Roberts, the defendant was in a car with a 21-year-old woman, they were travelling between two parties. The defendant touched the victim inappropriately which resulted in her jumping out the car, sustaining injuries. The proper test for occasioning, is not whether the defendant foresaw the behaviour of the victim but whether the behaviour could have reasonably been foreseen as the consequence of what he was doing/saying. The difference is, for assault the defendant desired to apprehend violence whereas for battery, the defendant was reckless as to whether such harm would be…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    General intent crimes are crimes that a person knowingly and willingly commits recklessly or negligently ("General Intent vs Specific Intent Crimes - List of Crimes", 2012).…

    • 228 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    You can have criminal intent, the conscious decision to hurt someone, without breaking the law, unfortunately. For example, many of the boys in the rape case hurtfully mocked the girl; some even threatened her. This is a conscious decision to hurt someone, but they were not punished at all through the legal justice…

    • 2603 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Assault causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent is a criminal offence which is covered by Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act, so both GBH with intent and Common Assault are categorised under two separate laws which is a difference. For this offence there needs to be “really serious harm” or a similarity between common assault and GBH with intent is that the assault or battery needs to have caused wounding of another person. Probably the best example of this is someone stabbing another person. Intention plays a key role when dealing with GBH. If there was intention to inflict this “really serious harm” then this would fall under Section 18 (the more serious offence). For example if a person head-butts another and breaks their nose they would be guilty of Section 20 if they had not specifically wanted to cause the damage, i.e. a broken nose. If the person knew exactly what they were doing and intended to cause the damage then they would be guilty of Section 18 and charged accordingly. Section 18 can in some cases result in life imprisonment but in reality sentences over ten years are extremely rare. A difference to common assault is that in the case of GBH the option of just a fine is not provided even if it is a first time offence. Also in the case of GBH it is often likely that bail will be refused due to the violent nature of the offence.…

    • 675 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In Mohan[1], direct intention was explained as being, ‘ a decision to bring about, in so far as it lies in the accused’s power (a particular consequence) no matter whether the accused desired that consequence or not’. The motive behind such intention is not intention itself but is used as evidence in proving that intention exists. S.8 CJA[2] requires that all mental elements be proven by reference to all evidence. So direct intention implies that the accused’s reason for acting was to bring about that consequence and this can be seen as the clearest possible case of intentional action, as the accused will be acting for the purpose of that consequence, hence holding the highest degree of blameworthiness. Direct intent has to be proven for cases such as murder and GBH with intent…

    • 2023 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Attempted Murder

    • 641 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Attempted to murder consist in two elements, the offender took some action towards killing another person, and the offenders act was intended to kill…

    • 641 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics