Basic and Specific Intent :)

BASIC INTENT

A basic intent crime is one where the mens rea is intention or recklessness and does not exceed the actus reus. In simple terms this means that the defendant does not have to have foreseen any consequence, or harm, beyond that laid down in the definition of the actus reus. For example:

• In the "simple" offence of criminal damage (contrary to s1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971), the actus reus comprises the damage or destruction of another's property; the mens rea need not go beyond an intention to do criminal damage.
• The actus reus of malicious wounding (contrary to s20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861), is wounding and a defendant can be convicted without proof of his having intended to do anything more than wound the victim.

SPECIFIC INTENT

A specific intent crime is one where in theory the mens rea goes beyond the actus reus, in the sense that the defendant has some ulterior purpose in mind. For example:

• In the "aggravated" offence of criminal damage (contrary to s1(2) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971), the offence is committed where a defendant causes damage or destruction to property with the intention of endangering life. The actus reus is almost identical to that of the simple offence, the differentiating factor is the further or "specific" intent that the defendant must possess, to endanger life.
• The actus reus of wounding with intent to do some grievous bodily harm (contrary to s18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861) is wounding. However, the defendant must be shown not only to have had the mens rea for wounding but also a further or "specific" mens rea, in the form of an intention to do some grievous bodily harm.
• Hence the reference to the "mens rea going beyond the actus reus".