R v Mohan
Direct intention means a decision to bring about the result, whether or not the defendant desired it.
Facts
Mr Mohan was driving when a police officer signalled him to stop. He slowed down, then accelerated towards the officer, who jumped out of the way to avoid being hit. Mr Mohan was charged with attempting by wanton driving to cause bodily harm. The judge directed the jury that it was enough if he was reckless as to whether he would cause bodily harm.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction. For an attempt, the prosecution must prove intention, and recklessness is not enough. James LJ defined intention as a decision to bring about, insofar as it lies within the accused's power, the commission of the offence which it is alleged the accused attempted to commit, no matter whether the accused desired that consequence of his act or not. This is the classic definition of direct intention.
Related cases on mens rea
- Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1998] AC 245
- R v Caldwell [1982] AC 341
- R v Church [1966] 1 QB 59
- R v Cunningham [1957] 2 QB 396
- R v G [2003] UKHL 50, [2004] 1 AC 1034
- R v Hancock and Shankland [1986] AC 455
- R v Latimer (1886) 17 QBD 359
- R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
