Law Homework Help

http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewconte… 

http://2012books.lardbucket.org/pdfs/introduction-… 

References for the above sources provided:

McMunigal, K. C. (2004). A statutory approach to criminal law (Links to an external site.). Saint Louis University Law Journal, 48, 1285-1295. Retrieved from http://reliablecommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewconten… 

Chapter 4: The elements of a crime (Links to an external site.). (2012). In Introduction to Criminal Law. Retrieved from http://2012books.lardbucket.org/pdfs/introduction-to-criminal- law/s08-the-elements-of-a-crime.pdf 

Chauser, J. [Jacqueline Chauser]. (2008, April 17). Components of a statute (Links to an external site.) [Video file]. Retrieved from (video)

Understanding the elements of a crime, particularly the distinctions between guilty mind and guilty act, are essential components for all criminal justice professionals to comprehend. Take the time this week to understand these concepts fully, and be prepared to use the information gained to analyze all criminal law questions throughout this course and in your professional career. It is natural to assume that either a mental state or criminal act can be easily proven; however, the old expression that “the devil is in the details” truly applies to these foundational, legal concepts. Always remember that the state must prove all elements of a criminal charge beyond a reasonable doubt, and that burden of proof rests solely on the state. Your initial post must be at least 300 words in length. Support your responses with credible sourcing, either from the required readings this week, or from independent research that you conduct in the University of Arizona Global Campus Library or online, and properly cite any references.

Please answer the following questions below:

• Distinguish between the terms actus reus and mens rea. How are they significant in criminal law?
• To what standard of law must the defendant’s mens rea be proven in order to gain a criminal conviction? Must the state prove “what the defendant was thinking at the time of the crime” in order to prove mens rea? Why or why not?
• To what standard of law must each element of the actus reus be proven, and why?
• Which of the two legal requirements listed above (i.e., actus reus and mens rea) is more difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial, and why?——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
• Discussion Post 2: This second assignment is a video transcript word document that you will need to write (that will have appropriate APA citing and references). I will complete the actual video, portion after you have created the transcript
• http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art… 
• http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art…
• https://ashford.instructure.com/courses/86746/file…
• References for above sources: 
• Johnson, V. B. (2015). Presumed fair? Voir dire on the fundamentals of our criminal justice system (Links to an external site.). Seton Hall Law Review 45(2), 545-580. Retrieved from http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art… 
• Varinsky, H. & Taylor, P. (2002). Trial myths and misconceptions  California Litigation, 15(1), 1-4. Retrieved from http://www.varinsky.com/publications/publication_1…EmorySchoolofLaw. (2010, February 5). The art of voir dire (Links to an external site.) [Video file]. Retrieved from (video). 
• ***This starts the beginning of discussion 2 instructions:
• As you know from the reading and video materials for this week, the term voir dire literally means truth. Your video presentation must show a comprehensive understanding of the process of voir dire and its significance in a criminal trial.
• In this discussion forum, you will prepare a two- to three-minute video presentation and post it within the discussion forum detailing the following information:
  • Explain the legal term voir dire, its origins, and its purposes.
  • Detail the process of voir dire, and distinguish between peremptory and discretionary strikes of potential jury members.
  • Provide an opinion of whether or not the process of voir dire serves its stated ends.
  • Create improvements in the current system of voir dire to ensure fair and impartial jurors for criminal trials.
  • Explain whether or not a defendant is entitled to a “fair” or a perfect jury.
  • Distinguish between peremptory strikes of jurors vs. strikes for cause of potential jurors.