Actus Reus

Question 1

Name the types of actus reus

Answer 1

Result crimes (causing a prohibited result)
Conduct crimes (performing a prohibited action)
Crimes of omission (failing to act)
States of affairs (e.g possession)

Question 2

Years is implicit presumption that actions in crimes are voluntary. What ways can you claim involuntariness?

Answer 2

Automatism
Relex action
Innocent agency
Uncontrolled external events

Question 3

Describe the defence
of Automatism

Answer 3

An action is ‘automatic’ when the accused exercises no consious control over it

E.g sleepwalking

Question 4

Describe the Defense using ‘reflex actions

Answer 4

Cases where there is action but it is unintentional.

E.e Hill v Baxter. Defendant claimed he blacked out before reaching the red light, though his foot was on the accelerator.

Question 5

Describe the defense of innocent agents

Answer 5

Accused doesn’t perform any action, they ade in a situation beyond their control.

E.g A pushes B, B falls on C, C is injured. B = innocent agent

Courts are generally sympathetic. Hogg v Macpherson 1928

Question 6

Describe the defense in ‘external events’ cases

Answer 6

Events beyond the accused control cause them to commit a ‘ state of affairs’ offence.

actus rea = being in a particular state of affairs.

E.g R v Larsonneur 1934. French woman left UK correct date, went to Ireland, they deported her back to the UK, when she arrived her date had passed, arrested for being in the country past the date.

Question 7

Describe a ‘continuing act’ in terms of criminal liability.

Answer 7

Generally the actus reus and mens rea must occur at the same time. When an act is initially incidental the required mens rea is later developed it is a ‘continuing act’

Question 8

Generally, there is ‘no commission by ommision’ When do liabilities from omissions arise?

Answer 8

When the accused has a ‘positive duty’ to act.

Question 9

Describe when an accused would have the ‘positive duty’ to act

Answer 9

Duties arising from relationship
Assumes responsibilties
Creation of a dangerous situation
Other legal (contractual) duties

Question 10

Describe the duties arising from relationship

Answer 10

e.g Parental duties to children.

It is the duty to do what is reasonable from the circumstances

Question 11

Describe the postive duties arising from assumption of responsibility

Answer 11

If you assume resonsibility for someone’s care you will be liable for your failure to care for them.

Question 12

Describe the duties arising from the creation of a dangerous situation

Answer 12

If you create a dangerous situation you have a duty to remedy that situation, you can be liable for your failure to do so.

Question 13

Describe the other legal duties that one can be held liable for

Answer 13

Causing harm through failure to fulfil contractual obligations may be criminal

Question 14

For result crimes, describe causation as an element of actus reus

Answer 14

There must be a casual link between what tthe accused did and the prohibited result

Question 15

What are the two essential elements of causation?

Answer 15

factual causation
legal causation

Question 16

Describe factual causation

Answer 16

As a matter of fact, were the accused’s actions a casual condition of the prohibited result. Use ‘but for’ test

“But for the accused’s actions, would the prohibited result have occurred?”

Question 17

Describe legal causation

Answer 17

Not all factual causes are legal causes.

e.g he set fire to a building, but for the presence of oxygen it wouldn’t have burned, but oxygen is not a legal cause here, his actions were.

Law must select ‘the causes’ of a result from its many ‘but for’ conditions. The accused must be a substantial cause, among others.

Question 18

Explain the ‘thin skull’ rule

Answer 18

Pre-existing characteristics of a victim do not negate causation. (no matter how strange) You take the victim as you find them.

e.g the victim has an unusually thin skull, you tap them on the head and they receive a brain injury. there’s no defence

Question 19

Provide a case as an example of the ‘thin skull’ rule

Answer 19

R v Blaue (1975). Defendant stabbed victim, victim told she heeded a blood transfusion to live, she refused it on the grounds of her belief and dies. Defendent was held liable and appealed. Court applied thin skull rule, not just physical attributes but in this case religious beliefs led her to refuse, that did not negate causation. He was still liable.

Question 20

What are some intervening acts or events that ‘break the chain of causation’ between the accused’s actions and the prohibited result.

Answer 20

Intervening acts of the victim
Intervening acts of third parties
Negligent medical treatment
Intervening natural events