Mens rea, or the mental state of a crime, must concur with the actus reus to complete the crime. This week in the readings we spent a great deal of time examining the various mental states.
A. Questions about a case:
1. In the context of defining culpability or blameworthiness when crafting a punishment, present a reasoned argument for or against charging someone who has HIV with a crime for infecting another persons with the disease.
2. State v. Stark: You may include discussion of the various mental states and use State v. Stark, 832 P.2d 109 (Wash.App. 1992) Click link to: Stark which can be found in the textbook.
3. Examples: In your analysis you may bring in additional similar cases (from the last five years), and analysis under the various mental states of whether a crime is or is not proper.
B. Mens Rea: Why do mental states matter in this modern world? If you kill someone, or rape them or bludgeon them in a fight, doesn't the end result remain the same?
Try to find a case or an article that shows how we treat different fact patterns and the mens rea in each according to the blameworthiness of the defendant, if you dare.