1. Actus Reus

Question 1

What are the elements of criminal liability?

Answer 1

AR + MR + absent valid defence = criminal liability.

Question 2

What is actus reus?

Answer 2

Elements of the offence that do not relate to the state of mind of the defendant.

Question 3

Where can actus reus be found?

Answer 3

In statute or common law.

murder is common law offence
theft or property damage is statute

Question 4

Who determines the guilt of the defendant?

Answer 4

Magistrates or a jury.

Question 5

What is the legal burden of proof for offences?

Answer 5

On the prosecution to prove all elements of the offence.

Question 6

What is the evidential burden for offences?

Answer 6

On the prosecution to provide sufficient evidence for each element of the offence.

Question 7

What is the standard of proof for the prosecution?

Answer 7

Beyond reasonable doubt.

Question 8

What is the legal burden of proof for defences?

Answer 8

On the defendant to prove their defence on the balance of probabilities.

defendant can simply go to witness box and say XYZ happened and that can amount for defense like self-defense. STandard of proof i beyond reasonable doubt

Question 9

What is the evidential burden for defences?

Answer 9

On the defendant to show sufficient evidence for their defence.

Question 10

What are conduct crimes?

Answer 10

Acts or omissions by the defendant.

Like perjury–> wilfully making a statement under oath that
the accused knows to be untrue. Perjury may be regarded as a ‘pure’ conduct crime because it is the defendant’s conduct rather than the result itself that is criminalised,

Question 11

Must conduct crimes be voluntary?

Answer 11

Yes, unless the accused acts involuntarily.

If a motorist is attacked by a swarm of bees while driving and crashes their car as a result, a charge of, say, careless driving would fail as their actions could not be said to be voluntary

Question 12

What is required for result crimes?

Answer 12

Certain consequences as a result of the defendant’s conduct.

Question 13

What is the result in a murder case?

Answer 13

The death of a human being.

Question 14

What is required for a conviction in a criminal damage case?

Answer 14

Property must be destroyed or damaged.

Question 15

What are state of affairs crimes?

Answer 15

Existence of certain circumstances at the time of conduct.

criminal offense that occurs when a defendant’s presence or status is enough to establish guilt.

Someone spikes your drink without you knowing and then you drive your car.

Even though X has not actually done anything other than sit in his car, he is guilty of an offence under s 4(2) of the Road Traffic Act (RTA) 1988, which makes it a crime to be
in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place while unfit to drive through drink or drugs.

Question 16

Give an example of a state of affairs crime.

Answer 16

Driving while unfit due to intoxication.

Question 17

What is the justification for imposing liability on someone who had no control over the situation?

Answer 17

Protecting and upholding public policy.

Question 18

What is the general rule regarding liability for omissions?

Answer 18

No liability unless there is a legal obligation to act.

Question 19

What is an example of a legal obligation to act under the Children Act 1989?

Answer 19

Parents have a duty to care for their children.

Question 20

When can a defendant be criminally liable for an omission?

Answer 20

When the law recognizes that they were under a duty to act and they failed to do so.

Question 21

What are some situations where a duty to act may arise?

Answer 21

Duty arising out of contract, special relationship, voluntary assumption of care, creation of a dangerous situation.

for statute: f failing to provide a police officer with a specimen of breath when asked to do so or failing to stop after a road traffic collision.

There is also these relatiomships”
doctors and nurses (to care for their patients);
* members of the emergency services (to take all reasonable steps to safeguard the
public);
* lifeguards (to act to ensure the safety of people using the swimming pool)

Question 22

Give an example of a duty arising out of contract.

Answer 22

Health care professionals have a duty to comply with their contracts.

ONLY APPLIES I.E THE CONTRACTUAL DUTY IF THEY ARE WORKING I.E IN THEIR CAPACITY AS A HEALTH INDIVIDUAL

Question 23

When can a defendant incur criminal liability for an omission based on a special relationship?

Answer 23

When there is a family tie or when the defendant has assumed a duty towards the victim.

Question 24

In what situations does a duty arise when a person voluntarily assumes care for another?

Answer 24

When the opposing person cannot care for themselves.

This could be due to a number of reasons – infancy,
mental illness or general ill-health.

Stone and Dobinson took in Stone’s sister, who was severely ill with anorexia and became bedridden. Despite their own challenges, they made minimal and ineffective attempts to care for her, and she eventually died from infected bed sores.

The court convicted them of manslaughter, ruling that by taking her in, they had a duty to act. Their failure to seek adequate help, like calling an ambulance, led to her death, establishing that individuals can be criminally liable if they undertake a caregiving role and neglect it, resulting in harm or death.

Question 25

When can a defendant be held criminally liable for creating a dangerous situation?

Answer 25

When they create the danger, become aware of it and fail to take reasonable measures to counteract it.

Question 26

What is the duty in a situation where a dangerous situation is created?

Answer 26

To take reasonable steps to avert harm.

Question 27

What is the principle of factual causation?

Answer 27

The defendant cannot be considered the cause if the event would have occurred the same way without their act or omission.

causation is an element of the actus reus and should be dealt with as such, rather than as a separate
entity or as part of the mens rea

Question 28

What is the ‘but for’ test?

Answer 28

Determines if the defendant’s actions caused the crime.

Would the result have occurred but for (in the absence of) the defendant’s actions? If the answer is yes – then the defendant is not liable.

Question 29

What is the principle of legal causation?

Answer 29

Defendant’s conduct must be a substantial and operative cause.

legal causation (proximate cause) assesses whether the harm was foreseeable and if the defendant’s actions were a substantial factor in causing the harm.

if there is no legal causation, actus reus is not established.

Question 30

What must be attributable to a culpable act or omission?

Answer 30

Consequence.

This means that legal causation will only be established if the result was due to the defendant’s action.

for a conviction, it must be proven that the negligent act directly caused the harm. Here, the negligent act (not holding reins) did not actually lead to the child’s death, as it wouldn’t have prevented it.

SO IF RESULT WOULD BE SAY WHETHER OR NOT THE DEFENDANT WAS NEGLIGENCE THEN NO ACTUS REUS

Question 31

Why must the consequence be attributable to the defendant?

Answer 31

To establish blame for the result.

Question 32

What must the culpable act be in relation to the consequence?

Answer 32

More than minimal cause.

Question 33

Does the culpable act need to be the sole cause?

Answer 33

No,
liability is not precluded if there are multiple causes.

The medical evidence indicates that no single stab wound caused Maurice’s death. However, it is established that both Eddie and Hugh caused him serious injury and it was the combination of their actions that killed Maurice.

Here, the two defendants have contributed significantly to the outcome and it does not matter that their individual act was not the sole or even the main cause of the defendant’s death

Question 34

What is the ‘egg shell skull’ rule?

Answer 34

Defendant must take the victim as they find them.

WHETHR THAT RELATES TO A HEALTH CONDITION OR FRATILITY BECAUSE OF OLD AGE

Question 35

What happens if the chain of causation is broken?

Answer 35

Defendant will not be the cause of the result and will be absolved of liability.

Question 36

What are intervening acts?

Answer 36

Acts or events unconnected that break the chain of causation.

Question 37

What are the three possibilities of intervening acts?

Answer 37

Victim’s acts, third party intervention, and intervening events.

Question 38

What must victim’s acts be in order to break the chain of causation?

Answer 38

Free, deliberate, and informed.

Question 39

What are ‘escape cases’?

Answer 39

Victim’s actions that are so daft and unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it.

fright and flight not included: the defendant was held liable for assault causing bodily harm when the victim jumped from a moving car to escape his sexual advances, as her reaction was seen as a natural response to his actions, thus not breaking the chain of causation.

the court will take into account:
* whether the escape is within the range of reasonable responses to be expected of a
victim in that situation;
* whether the victim’s response is proportionate to the threat; or
* whether it is so ‘daft’ as to be a voluntary act; and
* the fact that the victim is acting in ‘the agony of the moment’ without time for thought or
deliberation

Question 40

How does the principle of taking the victim as they find them apply to suicide?

Answer 40

Defendant may still be liable for the consequences of their act.

ruled that the defendant’s act of throwing acid, which led to the victim’s later decision for euthanasia, did not automatically break the chain of causation. The court needed to determine whether it was reasonably foreseeable that the victim might choose euthanasia due to the severity of his injuries.

Depends on what happens to defedant in terms of relieving the suffering.

Question 41

Refused Treatment

Answer 41

Will not break the chain because of egg-shell skull rule.

if a victim decided not to seek medical help and died of their injuries, the defendant would almost certainly remain
liable as their conduct contributed significantly to the victim’s demise

Alternatively, the court may find that the victim suffered from a mental condition which influenced their decision, in
which case the ‘thin skull’ rule would apply.

Question 42

Third party intervention

Answer 42

Defendant not liable if third party’s act is free, deliberate, informed, or not reasonably foreseeable.

Question 43

Medical Mistreatment

Answer 43

Must be independent and potent to make defendant’s actions insignificant.

to be valid has to be grossly negligent.

Question 44

Intervening events

Answer 44

Natural events (Act of God) or events other than natural ones.

Question 45

Act of God

Answer 45

A natural event that may break the chain of causation.

if ur in beach and u know someone out and tide pulls them into the sea that would not breack chain of causation.

Question 46

Foreseeability

Answer 46

Determining factor for liability in a subsequent event.