Abstract
An attempt to rebut the doli incapax presumption (that a child between 10 and 14 years is incapable of forming criminal intent) requires the court to consider the child defendant's understanding of the wrongfulness of his behaviour. At present there is no direct method of examining that understanding. The court instead relies on indirect evidence of the child's knowledge. Expert assessment of the child defendant can provide direct evidence of his or her understanding which, together with indirect evidence, may assist the court in determining whether the presumption is rebutted. Psychological and psychiatric literature is reviewed to provide criteria for that assessment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
