Evaluate the Actus Reus and Mens Rea of blackmail as defined in s of the Theft Act

Title: The Actus Reus and Mens Rea of Blackmail Under Section 21 of the Theft Act

I. Introduction
Blackmail is a serious criminal offense under Section 21 of the Theft Act 1968 in England and Wales. This essay will evaluate the Actus Reus and Mens Rea elements of blackmail as defined in this legislation.

II. Actus Reus of Blackmail
A. Definition
The Actus Reus of blackmail consists of the following elements:
1. Making an unwarranted demand with menaces.
2. With the intention to make a gain for oneself or cause a loss to another.

B. Unwarranted Demand
An unwarranted demand is one that has no reasonable justification or is made for a malicious purpose. It involves putting pressure on the victim to comply with the demand through the use of threats or coercion.

C. Menaces
Menaces include any threats of physical harm, economic loss, reputational damage, or any other form of coercion that induces fear in the victim. The threat must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to accede to the demand.

III. Mens Rea of Blackmail
A. Definition
The Mens Rea of blackmail requires the defendant to have:
1. The intention to make a gain for oneself or cause a loss to another.
2. Knowledge that the demand is unwarranted and accompanied by menaces.

B. Intention
The defendant must have the specific intention to obtain a gain for themselves or cause a loss to another person by making the demand with menaces. This intention must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

C. Knowledge
The defendant must be aware that the demand made is unwarranted and supported by menaces. This element focuses on the defendant's state of mind and their awareness of the wrongful nature of their actions.

IV. Case Law
A. R v. Clear
In the case of R v. Clear [1968], the court established that the Actus Reus of blackmail required an unwarranted demand supported by menaces. The defendant's actions must be such that they create fear or apprehension in the victim.

B. R v. Collister and Warhurst
In the case of R v. Collister and Warhurst [1957], the court emphasized the importance of the defendant's intention to make a gain or cause a loss through the use of menaces. The defendants were found guilty of blackmail for demanding money with threats of exposing embarrassing information.

V. Conclusion
In conclusion, the offense of blackmail under Section 21 of the Theft Act requires the fulfillment of both Actus Reus and Mens Rea elements for a conviction. The defendant must make an unwarranted demand supported by menaces with the intention to make a gain or cause a loss, and have knowledge of the wrongful nature of their actions. This essay has evaluated the Actus Reus and Mens Rea of blackmail as defined in the legislation and discussed relevant case law to illustrate these principles.