Some readers from Pennsylvania may wish to know more about how “mens rea” is handled in law. The term, which is Latin for “guilty mind,” has a number of applications that can play a vital role in the prosecution of a criminal case.
Mens rea is essentially the state of mind a person had at the time a crime was committed. In terms of sentencing, someone who did not intend a crime may be viewed to be less culpable than someone who acted maliciously, and this could lead to a more lenient punishment upon conviction. This is known as determining the motive of a defendant. Knowing a defendant’s motivation for the crime in question can also aid criminal defense attorneys during the mitigation process as a whole.
There are important distinctions to make in determining mens rea. For instance, an unintentional crime can be either a “mistake of law” or a “mistake of fact.” Mistakes of law are generally insufficient for avoiding criminal liability; it’s commonly understood that ignorance of the law cannot be used as an excuse for breaking it. However, defendants can also commit mistakes of fact, which can occur when someone commits an objectively illegal act in the sincere belief that the act was legally permissible. This can happen, for instance, if someone sells drugs without actually knowing he or she was selling drugs.
Given the apparent ambiguities inherent in determining mistakes of fact from mistakes of law, someone who is facing criminal charges may wish to discuss the matter with an attorney. A lawyer may provide valuable assistance in establishing a client’s state of mind during the act in question and use that knowledge as the basis for a solid defense. This type of legal advocacy might make a significant difference in the outcome of a case.