Guilty Acts Guilty Minds

When someone commits a crime what are the limits on a state's authority to define them as worthy of blame and thus liable to punishment? This book answers that question building on two ideas familiar to criminal lawyers: <em> actus reus</em> and <em>mens rea</em> usually translated as guilty act and guilty mind. <p/>In <em>Guilty Acts Guilty Minds</em> Stephen P. Garvey proposes an understanding of <em>actus reus</em> and <em>mens rea</em> as limits on the authority of a state and in particular the authority of a democratic state to ascribe guilt to those accused of crime. Garvey argues that <em>actus reus</em> and <em>mens rea</em> are necessary conditions for legitimate state punishment. Drawing on the work of political philosophers moral philosophers and criminal law theorists Garvey provides clear explanations of how these concepts apply to a wide variety of cases. The book charges readers to consider practical examples and ask: whatever you believe regarding the justice of the rules did the state act within the scope of its legitimate authority when it enacted those rules into law? <p/>Based on extensive research this book presents a new theory in which the concepts of <em>actus reus</em> and <em>mens rea</em> mark the limits of state power rather than simply describe the elements of a crime. Making the compelling distinction between legitimacy and justice <em>Guilty Acts Guilty Minds</em> provides an important perspective on the limits of state authority.<br>