Problem 1:
(a) To what extent do current legal definitions of direct and oblique intention align with ordinary usage of the word intention?
(b) Is it important for legal terms like intention to align with the word's ordinary usage? Or is it better to approach them as technical terms of art, which can carry whatever meaning is best suited to supporting the criminal law's distinctive goals? Give reasons for your answer.
Problem 2: Critically evaluate the extent to which Chan and Simester's arguments about mens rea could help legal scholars to frame and analyse the subjective/objective recklessness debates more effectively.