Actus reus

Question 1

What is actus reus?

Answer 1

All the elements that do not relate to the state of the mind of the defendant.

Question 2

Who owes the burden of proof in a criminal case?

Answer 2

The prosecution must prove all elements of the offence, including disproving the defence.

Question 3

Who owes the evidential burden in a criminal case?

Answer 3

The prosecution must provide sufficient evidence for each element of the offence.

Question 4

What is the standard of proof in a criminal case?

Answer 4

Beyond a reasonable doubt.

Question 5

When could the burden of proof shift to the defence?

Answer 5

A defendant may have the legal burden of proving their defence.

The evidential burden may also fall on the defence e.g. enough sufficient evidence to enable them to rely on a defence.

Question 6

What can actus reus consist of?

Answer 6

Conduct crimes (an act or failure to act)

Result crimes (consequences flowing from a defendant’s conduct)

Circumstance crimes (the existence of certain circumstances at the time of the conduct)

Question 7

What is a conduct crime?

Answer 7

A criminal offence where the actus reus requires proof of a particular behaviour or conduct to satisfy the actus reus.

Question 8

What is a result crime?

Answer 8

Where certain consequences follow from the actions of the defendant to satisfy the actus reus.

Question 9

What is a circumstance/state of affairs crime?

Answer 9

The existence of a state of affairs or particular set of circumstances can satisfy the actus reus.

Question 10

What is the general rule related to omissions?

Answer 10

There is no liability for omissions unless an exception applies.

Question 11

What are the exceptions relating to the general rule about omissions? (5)

Answer 11

A statutory duty to act

A contractual duty to act

A special relationship exists between the defendant and victim

A duty exists on voluntary assumption of care

A duty arises because the defendant created a dangerous situation and failed to take reasonable steps to avert it

Question 12

What is causation and who must prove it?

Answer 12

The prosecution must demonstrate the accused’s act or omission actually caused the prohibited consequence.

Question 13

What are the two types of causation?

Answer 13

Factual causation
Legal causation

Question 14

What is factual causation in a criminal context?

Answer 14

‘But for’ the defendant’s conduct, would the consequence have occurred? If the result would have occurred regardless of the conduct, factual causation is not established.

Question 15

What is legal causation in a criminal context?

Answer 15

Where the defendant’s conduct must be the substantial and operating cause of the consequence, unless there is an intervening act that breaks the chain.

Question 16

What are some of the rules that may apply to legal causation? (5)

Answer 16

Legal causation will only be established if the result was due to the defendant’s action.

The accused’s contribution is more than trivial or minimal.

The act does not need to be the sole cause.

The accused must take their victim as they find them e.g. eggshell skull rule.

The chain cannot be broken by an intervening act.

Question 17

What are the three possible ways that a chain of causation may be broken by an intervening act?

Answer 17

Where the victim acts in a particular way

Where an act by some other person intervenes between the defendant’s conduct and the result

Where an event occurs between the defendant’s conduct and the end result

Question 18

When can the act of a victim break the chain of causation?

Answer 18

Where a victim does something after the initial event but before the consequence occurs, and such intervention must be voluntary.

Question 19

Can a victim escaping a dangerous situation constitute a break in the chain of causation?

Answer 19

Only if the victim’s response is proportionate to the threat

Whether it is ‘daft’ to be a voluntary act

If the victim is acting in the agony of the moment.

Question 20

Can suicide constitute a break in the chain of causation?

Answer 20

Not typically - it would likely be within a range of reasonable responses expected within a particular situation.

This may change according to the circumstances.

Question 21

How can the act of a third party break the chain of causation?

Answer 21

Where their act is free, deliberate and informed or is not reasonably foreseeable.

Question 22

Can medical negligence break the chain of causation?

Answer 22

Very rarely - only if the medical negligence is so independent of the defendant’s actions and so potent in causing death that it makes the defendant’s actions insignificant.

Question 23

What types of events can break the chain of causation?

Answer 23

Acts of God - this depends on the foreseeability of the event