Talk:Mistake (criminal law)

For example, if a defendant goes into a supermarket and places eight items in a basket which is presented to the cashier for payment in the usual way. Both honestly believe that all eight items have been scanned, and the defendant pays the sum shown on the bill. A store detective, however, notices that a mistake was made by the cashier so that only seven items were actually priced. This detective arrests the defendant after leaving the store. Since the defendant honestly believes that he has become the owner of goods in a sale transaction, he cannot form the mens rea for theft (which is usually dishonesty) when he physically removes them from the store. Accordingly, he should be acquitted.

But, if A was in transit through an airport and picked up a bag which looked like his own, and that bag was to contain a bomb, A might attempt to argue that a mistake prevented him from being in possession of the bomb. In fact, this argument would fail because the defendant had the legal right to open, examine, and verify the contents of the bag.

this is contradictory. in the first example, the defendant had the legal right to examine and verify the receipt for the purchase. how are these legally different scenarios? --dan 07:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

definition?

Currently, the lead says what this is NOT, not what it IS. Can someone please add a definition (preferably in laymen terms)???? Thx.--345Kai (talk) 02:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)