Intention in Criminology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Intention in Criminology - Essay Example The criminal intention of an accused is to be proved with evidence. It is the interpretation of the jury duly applying the tests. The doctrine of law of murder is of two fold intention and causation. The doctrine of intention in the law of murder is vital doctrine. The doctrine of intention assigns the liability of murder. Intention denotes what is in the mind of the accused at the time of committing the crime and also the effect of the action. The doctrine of intention adjudges and infers the mind of the accused. The intention can be analyzed as direct intention and indirect intention. Direct intention: Direct intention means the aim, object or desire to do an act whose effects or results are prohibited under law as an offence. In this state of mind the person is surely designed and prepared to do some criminal act. An intention to commit murder is an example of direct intention. Indirect intention: Indirect intention is also known as oblique intention. In this state of mind the person does not desire the consequences or the results of his action but he knows that the results of his action, and he does not care for the result, it is due to his recklessness on the results. The direct intention of such person is some thing other but in process the result produces an offensive act. The best example of the oblique intention is that of the extremist activities. The extremist when they want to cause damage to the public property to show their protest against the action of the government they set fire to the public property such as telephone exchanges, railway stations, government buses etc. They know that there will be human loss still they do not care about. The crime of murder is the out come of oblique intention of the extremist and the crime of damage to the public property is the out come of direct intention. The existence of indirect or oblique intention of the person is tested in two ways. The one way is to see whether the consequence of the act is certain, and other one is the person who doing such act certainly knows the consequences of his action. Here the certainty of the consequence and the knowledge of the person about that consequence are important ingredients. When these two tests are fulfilled then the oblique intention exists in the action and the person will be held liable under the crime of oblique intent. These tests were dealt with in decided case of "R v Nedrick (1986) 8 Cr App R(S) 179; [1986] 3 All ER 1" . Intentional crimes: There are some crimes that can be done only intentionally that is to say these crimes can not be done unless there is clear intention to do such crime. Crime of attempts to murder, crime of ulterior intent, crimes of basic intent, crime of specific intent are the intentional crimes. Attempt to murder: "R v Mohan [1976] QB 1; [1975] 2 All ER 193" in this case the defendant committed a crime of attempt to murder by driving at a policeman. The policeman could escape by jumping at last moment and could save his life. The trial judge held it as an act of recklessness. But the appellate court felt it as an attempt to murder and insisted upon the proof of specific intent. Specific intention: Intoxication is the example for crime of Specific intention. Under this the defendant is not allowed to the plea of his drunken and intoxication to protect from the sentence of crime. If crime is established it is