The approach taken by the courts in applying recklessness using the case of Cunningham was that the defendant was aware of the risk involved in his action yet still continued in his venture. Caldwell widened the application by considering recklessness in situations where the accused either considered the risk to be minimal or that there was no risk at all. This notion was confirmed by Lord Keith in R v Reid  where he stated that ‘absence of something from a person’s state of mind is as much part of his state of mind as is its presence. Inadvertence to risk is no less a subjective state of mind that is a disregard of a recognized risk’. Where the courts are unable to prove the intention of the accused a lesser charge of manslaughter is likely to be substituted. The use of manslaughter is usually applied where the intent of the accused is oblique. The oblique intent is where the accused is aware that his actions might cause the death of the victim but this is not what the accused desires to happen. With direct intention, the accused actually wanted to kill the victim and the courts can invariably use the test for the foresight to support this assertion. Analysis of Responsibility for Violation of the Criminal Law.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples