The Required State of Mind for Criminal Culpability
Culpable – blame worthy
This session will deal with the historical approach to mens rea
“a guilty mind”
Traditional thinking – to deprive someone of life or liberty required that they have this “guilty state of mind”
That came from an intent, a state of mind indicating that the act to be punished was done with full knowledge and purpose
The majority of crimes still have this requirement, and they can be successfully defended by proving that the required intent was absent
Two broad categories of intent in early criminal law
General intent crimes
Specific intent crimes

Lecture notes, intent page 2
The insertion of non – intent or negligent crimes in traditional criminal law
The slippery slope- is negligence truly a state of mind?
Gross vs. simple negligence
The tortured history of negligent homicide in
Michigan
True non-intent crimes- reserved for later discussion as business crimes
Proving criminal intent
Direct evidence admission or confession
Circumstantial evidence including Motive
Requirement that intend and act coincide
The “Year and a Day” rule
Attempts to defend against criminal charge by negating the element of the required intend
1 st to 2 nd degree murder
Assault with intent to murder vs. GBH

Lecture Notes, Intent page 3
Insanity and Self Defense
Insanity
Self Defense