Essay on Doli Incapax

2195 Words Dec 21st, 2012 9 Pages
Legal Studies
HSC Assessment Task 1- Crime

* Definition * Age of Crime responsibility * Tests for rebutting doli incapax * Rebutting the presumption doli incapax (evidence) * Cases

Definition: * It’s a Latin term meaning 'incapable of wrong'; the presumption that children under a certain age cannot be held legally responsible for their actions and cannot be guilty of an offence.

Age of Criminal Responsibility:
Under 10s: * In NSW today, the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) lays out the minimum wage of criminal responsibility.
Under section 5 of Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) states that for children under 10 years old, doli incapax is a conclusive presumption (legal
…show more content…
2. The child knew the act was seriously wrong as opposed to naughty. 3. The evidence relied upon by the prosecution must be strong and clear beyond all doubt or contradiction. 4. The evidence to prove the accused’s guilty knowledge, as defined above, must not be the mere proof of doing the act charged, however, horrifying or obviously wrong the act may be. 5. The older the child is the easier it will be for the prosecution to prove guilty knowledge.

The prosecution must rebut the presumption of doli incapax as an element of the prosecution case. * The presumption of doli incapax is not a defence; it is an element of the prosecution case. * If the prosecution fails to call evidence to the presumption there is no case to answer. * However if there is evidence that could satisfy a jury, the hearing or trial will proceed.

The child knew the act was seriously wrong as opposed to naughty. * In order to rebut presumption of doli incapax the prosecution must prove that the child defendant did the act charged and that in doing that act he/she knew that it was a wrong act as a distinct from naughty. * However it is difficult to determine whether the correct test is naughty, wrong or seriously wrong. * The prosecution must show that the act was ‘seriously’ wrong and not just something that would invite parental disapproval.

The evidence relied upon by the prosecution must be strong and

Related Documents