Offers & Competitions6 mins ago
Please Don’T Mock This Man’S Hair, Or The Police Will Be On To You
Police in south Wales have warned people who have mocked the hairstyle of a wanted drug dealer that they could find themselves facing prosecution.
https:/ /ichef. bbci.co .uk/new s/660/c psprodp b/4D6A/ product ion/_10 8281891 _wanted .jpg
https:/
Answers
I mock the hair, and I mock the police farce who p\osted this nonsense.
18:20 Mon 12th Aug 2019
// Can we mock his hair without being malicious? I need to clarify the legal position before I start mocking..//
oh... yes you can
recently came up in court - if you do something without guilty intent ( mens rea) then could you still be guilty of the crime?
Supreme Ct said no
having gone thro the law student bete nwaaar - Sweet v Parsley 1970. Landlord convicted of drug dealing because unknown to him his tenants were dealers.
Over-ruled by HL. There has to be a mental element ( = mens rea)
Came up in r v Letts 2018- Parents were indicted for sending money to young Letts ( letts minor) to fly home from er jihadi -land, indicted for financing terrorism. was there a mental element to this or did sending money suffice?
held - yes there was a mental element
when the case 2019 came to trial - the above case was a rare what-if, it was found the parents did have the required mental element and so they were convicted
well sorry - you asked !
oh... yes you can
recently came up in court - if you do something without guilty intent ( mens rea) then could you still be guilty of the crime?
Supreme Ct said no
having gone thro the law student bete nwaaar - Sweet v Parsley 1970. Landlord convicted of drug dealing because unknown to him his tenants were dealers.
Over-ruled by HL. There has to be a mental element ( = mens rea)
Came up in r v Letts 2018- Parents were indicted for sending money to young Letts ( letts minor) to fly home from er jihadi -land, indicted for financing terrorism. was there a mental element to this or did sending money suffice?
held - yes there was a mental element
when the case 2019 came to trial - the above case was a rare what-if, it was found the parents did have the required mental element and so they were convicted
well sorry - you asked !
// There is a TV advert....... jibber jabber yap yap yap - incredibly the racist old man hasnt dragged the phrase "black moron" hair ...... into all this which in turn reminds her of a bag of chips, should that avert be banned?
no - in this case not only is there no mental element ( intention to mock or insult ) , there is no guilty act ( actrus reus).
full house of inncence there then
no - in this case not only is there no mental element ( intention to mock or insult ) , there is no guilty act ( actrus reus).
full house of inncence there then
PP // if you do something without guilty intent ( mens rea) then could you still be guilty of the crime? //
Yes you can, if at the time it is reasonable to assume that the defendant should have known the consequences of his action.A case
stated from long ago:- A thief entered the cellar of a house and sawed through the gas pipes in order to steal the lead.Convicted of manslaughter.
Yes you can, if at the time it is reasonable to assume that the defendant should have known the consequences of his action.A case
stated from long ago:- A thief entered the cellar of a house and sawed through the gas pipes in order to steal the lead.Convicted of manslaughter.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.