Mens Rea, Actus Reus, and Criminal Defenses in a Hypothetical Case

Introduction

This paper examines a hypothetical criminal case and addresses the following concepts in relation to it: mens rea, actus reus, mistake of law, and mistake of fact. It presents arguments in defense of the client — to demonstrate why he should not be prosecuted — as well as the opposing arguments from the prosecution. Lastly, the paper debates how this particular case ought to be judged.

Case Background

Johnny Juneau, a recluse aged 57 who resided in a hut in the forest, led an ordinary life. The kindly and good-hearted Johnny, however, held a highly mistaken outlook on life. All his friends considered him to be intellectually limited. Juneau last held a job in 1978, from which he was dismissed when he fixed the oven at the restaurant where he worked as a waiter, causing it to spurt flames twelve feet high. Juneau claimed he was only trying to help, believing his workplace's efficiency would increase with a more powerful oven. What he actually achieved was burning four city blocks to the ground and singeing off the mayor's characteristic handlebar mustache permanently.

One day, Juneau loaded swamp creatures onto his old truck — approximately forty years old, with barely 7,000 miles of life remaining — and drove to the nearest town, Gatorville. The residents of Gatorville were always excited when Juneau showed up, as he invariably did something unpredictable. On the day in question, he intended to barter his swamp creatures for beer and gas. He pulled into the town's gas station, and that is where the problems began.

Previously, in 2001, when Juneau had last visited Gatorville, gas prices were $1.40 a gallon. The sign now showed $4.42 a gallon. Juneau, unable to comprehend the price, assumed something was wrong with the sign and decided to fix it for the townspeople. He borrowed a neighbor's ladder and changed the "4" to a "1," so that the sign read $1.42. He believed gas prices had increased by only two cents since his previous visit. While descending the ladder, it touched an uninsulated portion of the station's signboard — without his knowledge — thereby becoming electrified. Johnny could not, by any means, have anticipated this. He left the ladder in place and walked into the store to barter six nutria he had caught in exchange for six gallons of gas. (Nutria are small swampland rodents.) The last time he had kept up with current events, the creatures were worth around two dollars per pound. Recently, however, the government had determined that nutria meat possessed unusual properties; consequently, the animals were classified as an endangered species, and even possessing nutria had been made a capital offense. The shocked storekeeper, despite knowing Juneau, told him he could not bring nutria into the store and proceeded to notify the police.

The police arrived to arrest Juneau. While he was being placed in the police van, the neighbor arrived, demanding to know why his ladder was propped up at the gas station. Juneau truthfully explained that he had borrowed it and that the neighbor could now take it back. On touching the electrified ladder, the neighbor was electrocuted. Finally, before leaving the gas station, the police deputy filled gas into her van, believing it to be priced at $1.42 per gallon. When the storekeeper quoted her the actual price, the deputy refused to pay the difference shown on the altered signboard. The storekeeper became angry and accused Juneau of theft for giving away his gas. Juneau was ultimately charged with three offenses: possessing nutria, the neighbor's murder, and gas theft.

Defense Arguments

Almost all crimes possess two elements: actus reus (the criminal act) and mens rea (criminal intent). Both the action and the intent behind it are typically required to find an individual guilty of an offense under American criminal law. Actus reus, the Latin term for "guilty act," implies that there must be a physical act — visible physical action is what renders an individual liable for a crime. This condition is required under U.S. law for crime commission, since no one can be found guilty merely for wishing that a crime would occur or for harboring criminal ideas. A majority of crimes also require the criterion of mens rea, meaning "guilty mind" in Latin — that is, what the suspect was thinking and what his or her intention was at the time of the alleged crime is of significance (Mens Rea — A Defendant's Mental State, FindLaw, n.d.; WiseGEEK, n.d.). Through the doctrine of mens rea, the U.S. criminal justice system distinguishes between unintentional and intentional offenses.

When considering these two elements, Juneau is not, in fact, guilty. He cannot be accused of murder, as he had not the slightest idea that the propped-up ladder would become electrified and thus electrocute anyone who touched it — in this case, its owner. For both elements to be satisfied, it would need to be shown that Juneau intended for the neighbor to be killed by telling him to take back his ladder. The defendant, however, did not know the ladder was electrified; he merely meant to indicate that his use of the ladder was finished and was returning it. There is clearly no motive for murder here.

The concept of mistake of law refers to errors an individual may make in understanding how a relevant law applies to prior conduct under court analysis (Singer & La Fond, 2007). The concept of mistake of fact, by contrast, holds that although an individual may have carried out the physical elements of a particular crime, the act was committed under a mistaken factual belief — thereby negating mens rea — and the individual may therefore escape liability. In Johnny Juneau's case, this defensive approach can certainly be adopted. When observing the price of gas, Juneau failed to understand that it had escalated to such a degree since his last visit to town. He genuinely believed he was doing a helpful deed by correcting the sign; theft never entered his mind. In this sense, Juneau is himself a victim of his own ignorance.