词条 | R v Woodrow |
释义 |
DecisionThe defendant was charged with violating a statute that prohibited possession of adulterated tobacco. The court held the defendant criminally liable even though he had no knowledge or reason to suspect the adulteration. The court justified this adoption of strict liability as being in the interests of convenient prosecution.[2] This decision overruled Rex v. Dixon, which had included a mens rea requirement.[3] References1. ^Bonnie, R.J. et al. Criminal Law, Second Edition. Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2004, p. 252 {{England-hist-stub}}{{England-law-stub}}2. ^Bonnie, p. 252 3. ^Bonnie, p. 252 8 : English criminal case law|1846 in case law|1846 in England|Court of Exchequer Chamber cases|Food safety scandals|Tobacco in the United Kingdom|Food safety in the United Kingdom|1846 in British law |
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。