No, I can't agree. I think you have confused the point I was trying to make, sorry if my legal language was incorrect! I was not trying to make any comment on the burden of proof, I was focusing on the elements of mens rea. If mens rea is not relevant why are the stewards distinguishing between intention and culpability in their report? The stewards will need to convince the RABD in probability that Jason Lee 'intended' not to take all reasonable and permissible measures during the course of the race.