According to R v Beatty, what is the first step in determining objective mens rea?

The correct approach to determining objective mens rea, as established in R v Beatty, is to analyze the relevant evidence holistically. This means considering all available evidence to assess how a reasonable person would have acted in similar circumstances. The focus is on the conduct of the accused in relation to the objective standard of a reasonable person, rather than on their individual mindset or intentions.

This holistic analysis involves looking at the entirety of the situation, including the context in which the accused acted, the circumstances surrounding the event, and the standard of care expected from a reasonable person. This is crucial in applying the objective mens rea standard, as it seeks to establish whether the accused's actions were unreasonable in light of those circumstances.

Conversely, assessing subjective thoughts or determining intent pertains to subjective mens rea, which is focused on the personal mental state of the accused, rather than an objective standard. Examining witness statements might provide context or support for the evidence but does not directly answer the question of objective mens rea in the same comprehensive manner as a holistic analysis.