Actus reus Flashcards
Actus reus
Guilty act
Must be voluntary
Must be voluntarily acted or omitted by D
I.e. by their free will
So pushed into someone or acting under duress wont count or having severe cramp
Automatism
Called a defence but is basically a lack of actus reus
If D has a total loss of control over their actions they aren’t liable due to automatism
Actus reus as a continuing act
Can be a continuing act
If so, mens rea doesn’t need to be present the whole time
May not be present at the start but then come later while the actus reus is still continuing
E.g. driving over policeman’s foot, him telling you to move, then deliberately leaving it on there
Omissions
Generally there is no liability for failure to act, unless person has a duty imposed by law
DUTY to act remembered by DUTY
DUTY
D - dangerous situation created by D
U - under statute
T - take it upon themselves
Y - young person
Dangerous situation created by D
E.g. when squatter saw mattress on fire from his fag and just moved to another room and went back to sleep = arson
Under statute
Statute - child neglect, failing to stop at an accident
Contract - gate keeper not closing gates at level crossing, doctor and patient
Taken upon themselves
If D takes it upon themselves to care for another who is unable to care for themselves then fails to care for that person
Young person
Parental responsibility to look after a child
Chain of causation and but for test
Must show a causal link between act and consequence
But for D’s act/omission, the consequence would not have happened
Eggshell skull rule
You must take your victim as you find him
Intervening act
Chain of causation can be broken by a new intervening act which is free, deliberate and informed
Is drug dealer supplying drugs an intervening act?
If drug dealer supplies and then buyer kills himself from an overdose, drug dealer is not liable - death would have been brought about by the deliberate exercise of free will by the user.
So supplier is unlikely to be held liable for causing the death unless they play a more active role in administering the drug e.g. injecting them.
Does medical negligence break the chain of causation?
No
Only if gross negligence
So if it is the substantial and operating cause of the death
E.g. in hospital from stab wounds, they were healing, then given wrong drug which caused death
What if V jumps out of car?
If Vs actions could be reasonably anticipated from any victim in such a situation, there will be no new intervening act and D will be responsible for any consequences that arise.
Can exceptional natural event break chain of causation?
If it was the sole immediate cause of the consequence then yes.
Must be so powerful a nature that the conduct of D was not a cause but merely part of the surrounding circumstances.
Principal
Person whose conduct has met all the requirements of the offence
Accessory
Someone who helped in or brought about the commission of the offence
Are accessories treated the same as principle offenders?
If accessory aids, abets, counsels, procures the commission of an offence, they will b treated the same as the principle offender.
Counselling and procuring usually take place before the commission of an offence
Aiding
Giving help, support or assistance
Abetting
Inciting, instigating or encouraging
Counselling
Advising or instructing
Don’t have to show a causal link, just have to show P was aware of As advice or encouragement
Doesn’t matter if P would have committed the offence anyway
Procuring
Bringing about
Must show causal link between As conduct and the offence
What if A is not present during the offence?
If P relies on acts of A which assist in the preliminary stages of a crime later committed in A’s absence, it is necessary to prove intentional assistance by A in acts which A knew were steps taken by P towards the commission of an offence.
So must prove:
A did an act which in fact assisted in the later commission of an offence
A did the act deliberately realising that it was capable of assisting the offence
A, at the time of doing so, contemplated the commission of the offence, and
When doing the act, A intended to assist P
Do you need an identified principal?
No, A may still be guilty even if there is no identified principal
Can A still be convicted if the principal is acquitted or has a defence?
Yes
What if A changes their mind before offence is carried out?
A can change their mind
But the exact requirements for making an effective withdrawal before any liability is incurred are unclear
Running away at the last moment is not enough
Evidence could be acting in a way which amounts to the countermanding of any earlier assistance
Mens rea for accessories
Generally the mens rea for an accessory is - proof of intention to aid as well as knowledge of the circumstances
Minimum mens rea is at least knowing the essential matters that constitute that offence
Joint enterprise
Where 2 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 i.e. that an offence will be committed
Parasitic accessory liability
What if A goes beyond that which was agreed or contemplated by B?
For jury to infer
Corporate liability
Companies which are legally incorporated have a legal personality so can commit offences
Can be guilty as principals and accessories
Vicarious liability
In some circumstances liability can be transmitted vicariously to another
E.g. employers can be held accountable for wrongdoings of employees
