Motive is not an element of criminal responsibility but it is properly demonstrated as relevant

R. v. Roncaioli, 2011 ONCA 378 properly reminds us that motive is not (normally) an element of an offence. Why someone commits a crime is usually not relevant to the required mens rea. That said, motive is proper as a matter of proof because it makes the act more likely:


[43]         Although motive is not an essential element of criminal responsibility, it is relevant in that it makes it more likely that the accused committed the crime.  Here, although the appellant was not charged with murder – a fact the Crown expressly told the jury – the Crown could nonetheless rely on the appellant's motive to want his wife dead as a piece of circumstantial evidence showing that the appellant intentionally injected his wife with the anaesthetics and thus helping to prove manslaughter by an unlawful act.  Whether he had a motive to want his wife dead and its role, if any, in proving the Crown's case were matters the trial judge correctly left for the jury to decide.