R v Smith (1960) 2 QB 423

Court: Court of Appeal

Facts: D, a journalist, offered a bribe to the mayor of a town in an attempt to expose the mayor’s corrupt practices. D’s intention was to expose corruption rather than to actually engage in a corrupt transaction. However, D was charged and convicted of bribery under the Bribery Act.

Held: The Court of Appeal upheld D’s conviction. The court ruled that D had the necessary mens rea (intention) to commit the crime of bribery when he offered the bribe, regardless of his underlying motive to expose corruption. The criminal law focuses on D's intention to commit the actus reus (the bribe), not on the motive behind it.

💡Levelup : This case reinforces the principle that criminal liability arises from the intention to commit the prohibited act (actus reus), not the underlying motive or purpose behind the act.