Criminal liability “In a just society, criminal liability should never be imposed without a certain degree of culpability” Strict liability crimes are those which do not require any mensrea towards at least one or more of the criminal act. Mensrea usually requires intent and/or recklessness. However, some crimes can be committed without any knowledge, intent or responsibility on the part of the defendant. Therefore the main question is whether these defendants are guilty and held responsible for these crimes under strict liability. In the 1984 case of Gammon (Hong Kong) ltd v Attorney General (Hong Kong), the grounds on which strict liability can be imposed were introduced; As a general rule, the more serious the crime under the law, the less likely it is that courts will consider it a strict liability crime. For acts that are truly criminal the mens rea should be necessary to make the accused liable and this is the jurisprudence, however the type of crime where the mens rea is not necessary and one can be liable is when the law concerns a matter of social right. worry. This principle was outlined in Sweet v Parsley 1970; the defendant was convicted under section 5 of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1965, for "being concerned in the management of premises used for the smoking of cannabis". She appealed on the grounds that she had no knowledge of the circumstances and could not reasonably have expected to have had such knowledge. The House of Lords, quashing the conviction, held that it must be shown that the accused... middle of paper... the crime occurred. I believe this is sensitive territory for judges and that each case should be examined in isolation and judges should have the right to discretion. Each case will have different facts and different levels of liability and therefore it is not possible to establish one rule for all strict liability cases. Strict liability should not be abolished entirely, however it should be examined by the Law Commission in order to prevent those who have no control over a crime and without the means to prevent it from being responsible for the crime. In a just society people should not be convicted just for raising an issue for the general public or for the sole reason that a judge thinks someone should be held accountable and the defendant is the only reasonable person to charge, since this is not a reasonable reason to accuse someone..