Academic Integrity: tutoring, explanations, and feedback — we don’t complete graded work or submit on a student’s behalf.

9.A reckless state of mind implies that one acts without an intention to harm, b

ID: 3487090 • Letter: 9

Question

9.A reckless state of mind implies that one acts without an intention to harm, but with a complete disregard for the rights and safety of others and harm is caused as a result.

a.True

b.False

10.Religious beliefs will not typically excuse commission of a crime. a. True

b. False

11.The prosecution must always prove that an accused is sane in a criminal trial.

a.True

b.False

12.Duress is a valid defense when one commits a crime under threat from another person if the commission of the crime avoids a greater harm.

a.True

b.False

13.If Joe breaks into George’s house thinking he has drugs to steal, but George does not, Joe is entitled to assert a mistake of fact defense.

a.True

b.False

14.Statute of limitations means that a state only has a certain period of time after a crime is committed in which to initiate the criminal process.

a.True

b.False

Explanation / Answer

9.True

Explanation: While a trial in the court proceedings, recklessness of the mind or reckless state of mind is called 'mens rea' where recklessness refers to a state stronger than negligence where a person pays no regard or little regard to their actions and it's consequential harm to others.

10. True.

Explanation : The Constitution and law is designed based on the values of secularism, equality and justice. Therefore religious beliefs are not excuse for criminal behaviour and no such concession is also provided by law.

11. True

Explanation : The individual being held for trail in court must be mentally in a sound state to be considered fit for trial. Therefore it is necessary for the prosecution to prove that an accused is sane.

12. True

Explanation : Duress can be defined threats, violence or force used to coerce someone to act against his or her will. For duress to hold as a valid argument for a crime the threatened act should be greater than the harm caused by the crime.