1.2 Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct)

Question 1

For a person to be found guilty of a criminal offence you must show that he/she?

Answer 1

• acted in a particular way;
• failed to act in a particular way (omissions); or
• brought about a state of affairs.
  This is theactus reusof an offence, i.e. the behavioural element of an offence.

Question 2

When proving the requiredactus reus, you must show?

Answer 2

• The defendant conduct was voluntary

- that it occurred while the defendant still had the requisite mens rea

Question 3

What is the difference between a voluntary act and an involuntary act?

Answer 3

This can best be understood by considering that a voluntary act is something done by the defendant, whereas an involuntary act is something that happens to a defendant. You must show that a defendant acted or omitted to act ‘voluntarily’; that is, by the operation of free will.

Question 4

Are reflex actions classed as being willed or voluntary?

Answer 4

No- hence the (limited) availability of the ‘defence’ of automatism.

Question 5

Provide an example where a sudden physical impairment could render any linked action as ‘involuntary’?

Answer 5

such as severe cramp when driving, actions when sleepwalking.

However If the onset of the impairment could reasonably have been foreseen (e.g. where someone is prone to blackouts), the defendant’s actions may be said to have been willed in that he/she could have prevented the loss of control or at least avoided the situation (e.g. driving) which allowed the consequences to occur.

Question 6

Explain Automatism?

Answer 6

Criminal conduct must be voluntary and willed; it follows that if defendants have total loss of control over their actions, they cannot be held liable for those actions and there may be grounds to claim a defence of automatism.

Question 7

Explain Coincidence with Mens Rea?

Answer 7

It must be shown that the defendant had the requisite mens rea at the time of carrying out the actus reus. However, there is no need for that ‘state of mind’ to remain unchanged throughout the entire commission of the offence.

Example: If a person (X) poisons another (Y) intending to kill Y at the time, it will not alter X’s criminal liability if X changes his mind immediately after giving the poison or even if X does everything he can to halt its effects (R v Jakeman (1983) 76 Cr App R 223).

Question 8

Can the required ‘state of mind’ come later while the actus reus is still continuing?

Answer 8

Yes- this happens, whereby the mens rea ‘catches up’ with the actus reus, the offence is complete at the first moment that the two elements (actus reus and mens rea) unite.

Question 9

Explain no liability for a failure (or omission) to act?

Answer 9

Most criminal offences require a defendant to carry out some positive act before liability can be imposed. Ordinarily, there is no liability for a failure (or omission) to act unless the law specifically imposes such a DUTY on a person.

Example: A sees B drowning and is able to save him by holding out his hand. A abstains from doing so in order that B may be drowned, and B is drowned. A has committed no offence.

Question 10

What does the acronym DUTY stand for in relation to Omissions?

Answer 10

A DUTY can arise from a number of circumstances, the main ones being:
D- Dangerous situation created by the defendant.
U- Under statute, contract or a person’s public ‘office’.
T- Taken it upon him/herself—the defendant voluntarily undertakes to care for another who is unable to care for him/herself as a result of age, illness or infirmity and then fails to care for that person.
Y- Young person—in circumstances where the defendant is in a parental relationship with a child or a young person, i.e. an obligation exists for the parent to look after the health and welfare of the child and he/she does not do so.

Question 11

Explain casual link?

Answer 11

Once the actus reus has been proved, you must then show a causal link between it and the relevant consequences. That is, you must prove that the consequences would not have happened ‘but for’ the defendant’s act or omission.

Question 12

Explain chain of causation?

Answer 12

Chain of causation- linked series of events leading from cause to effect, typically in the assessment of liability for damages

Question 13

Explain Intervening act?

Answer 13

The causal link can be broken by a new intervening act provided that the ‘new’ act is ‘free, deliberate and informed’

Question 14

Explain the rule which says defendants must ‘take their victims as they find them’?

Answer 14

This means that if victims have a particular characteristic, such as a very thin skull or a very nervous disposition, which makes the consequences of an act against them much more acute, that is the defendant’s bad luck.

Question 15

Provide an example where Actions by the victim will sometimes be significant in the chain of causation?

Answer 15

Such as where a victim of a sexual assault was injured when jumping from her assailant’s car in an attempt to escape (R v Roberts (1971) 56 Cr App R 95). Where such actions take place, the victim’s behaviour will not necessarily be regarded as introducing a new intervening act. If the victim’s actions are those which might reasonably be anticipated from any victim in such a situation, there will be no new and intervening act and the defendant will be responsible for the consequences flowing from them.

Question 16

What is a principle offender?

Answer 16

A principal offender- is one whose conduct has met all the requirements of the particular offence.

Question 17

What is an accessory?

Answer 17

An Accessory- someone who helped in or brought about the commission of the offence. If an accessory ‘aids, abets, counsels or procures’ the commission of an offence, he/she will be treated by a court in the same way as a principal offender for an indictable offence (Accessories and Abettors Act 1861, s. 8) or for a summary offence (Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, s. 44).

Question 18

Generally speaking, the expressions aiding, abetting, counselling and procuring mean the following?

Answer 18

• aiding = giving help, support or assistance;
• abetting = inciting, instigating or encouraging.
  Each of these would usually involve the presence of the secondary party at the scene (unless, for example, part of some pre-arranged plan):
• counselling = advising or instructing;
• procuring = bringing about.

Question 19

What of the situation where the accessory is not present during the substantive offence?

Answer 19

The position can be summarised as follows:
Where the principal (P) relies on acts of the accessory (D) which assist in the preliminary stages of a crime later committed in D’s absence, it is necessary to proveintentional assistance by Din acts which D knew were steps taken by P towards the commission of the crime. Therefore the prosecution must prove:
- an act done by D;
- whichin factassisted the later commission of the offence;
- that D did the act deliberately realising that it was capable of assisting the offence;
- that D, at the time of doing the act, contemplated the commission of the offence by P; and
- that, when doing the act, D intended to assist P.

Question 20

What is the minimum state of mind required of an accessory?

Answer 20

In that case, the court held that before anyone can be convicted of aiding and abetting an offence, he/she must at least know the essential matters that constitute that offence. Therefore the accessory to an offence of drink/driving (see Road Policing, chapter 3.5) must at least have been aware that the ‘principal’ (the driver) had been drinking (Smith v Mellors and Soar (1987) 84 Cr App R 279).

Question 21

What is a Joint Enterprise?

Answer 21

A joint criminal enterprise exists where two (or more) people embark on the commission of an offence by one or both (or all) of them. It is a joint enterprise because all the parties have a common goal—that an offence will be committed.

Question 22

What is Parasitic Accessory Liability?

Answer 22

What happens when one party goes beyond that which was agreed or contemplated by the other? This particular narrower area of secondary responsibility is described as ‘parasitic accessory liability’.

Example- Two men (A and B) agree to carry out an offence of theft. During the course of the offence, the owner of the property subject of the offence appears and tries to prevent the offence taking place. Offender A produces a flick-knife and stabs the victim, causing grievous bodily harm. Offender B had no idea that offender A had a flick-knife and had never contemplated the use of violence during the theft offence.

Question 23

What is corporate liability?

Answer 23

Companies which are ‘legally incorporated’ have a legal personality of their own and they can commit offences.

Question 24

What is Vicarious Liability?

Answer 24

The general principle in criminal law is that liability is personal. There are, however, occasions where liability can be transmitted vicariously to another.

Example- The most frequent occasions are cases where a statutory duty is breached by employees in the course of their employment (National Rivers Authority v Alfred McAlpine Homes (East) Ltd [1994] 4 All ER 286), or where a duty is placed upon a particular individual, such as a licensee, who delegates some of his/her functions to another.