... or not, i.e. the accused has foreseen that the particular kind of harm might be done and yet has gone on to take the risk of it anyway. This view was followed in R v Stephenson (1979), the defendant went to sleep in a haystack and lit a fire to keep warm. He was convicted of arson. A consultant psychiatrist said the accused was capable of lighting a fire without taking the danger into consideration. His conviction was quashed because his mental condition may have prevented him from appreciating a risk which would have been obvious to any normal person. Objective recklessness, also known as Caldwell recklessness, is where the defendant is judged as a reasonable man. A reasonable man would foresee the defendant's actions would create an obvious risk of injury/danger/harm. In MPC v Caldwell 1982 the defendant was fired from a hotel and when drunk he broke a ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now