3 ms·

IANAL, especially in American law, but mens rea is usually a neccessary element for criminal liability.

• giancarlostoro 7y ago
  Hadnt heard of the term before: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
  • Ensorceled 7y ago
    It's okay, there are a number of people in this thread who haven't. The interesting part is, legally, how there are two separate parts: intent (I intended to do this action, why car accidents are not murder) and knowledge (I knew, or should have known, this was a crime). In this case, they could not form mens rea because, to their knowledge, they had permission to "break into" the building. Like when you lock yourself out of your house and hire a locksmith to "break in". The locksmith has intent, but no "criminal knowledge" because you gave them permission.
    • danpalmer 7y ago
      I guess the "or should have known" is a key part here. In most cases where the person didn't know, they should have. The difference here being that they _did_ know that they _weren't_, and they had probably taken reasonable steps to ensure that they weren't breaking the law.
      • Ensorceled 7y ago
        Right, "ignorance of the law is no excuse", but in this case they had an exemption.