... is present. The mens rea is present for Alan because he has the guilty mind. He is guilty of conspiracy with Basil to cause criminal damage to property. In order to find out if Alan is not liable for criminal damage we must look at intention in the case of R v woolin (1998) intention is another form of mens rea. Intention can be divided in to direct intention and indirect intention. Alan can be liable for being reckless, as he didn't have enough mens rea to cause serious criminal damage that can endanger life of people. I came to this conclusion using Caldwell recklessness test. (MPC v Caldwell (1982) Under section 5(3) Alan might not be liable for criminal damage if he explains his reasons for committing the offence as they can be considered reasonable. How ever what is considered reasonable by different defendants may differ therefore the courts are more reluctant to ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now