Actus Reus Flashcards
What are the elements of a criminal offence?
ACTUS REUS + MENS REA + NO DEFENCE
Are actus reus and mens rea always required for the commission of a crime?
Actus reus is always required. Mens rea is not an element of strict liability and criminal negligence offences.
Definition of Actus Reus
The external element of a crime, the conduct or physical action, its result and the surrounding circumstances. Actus reus also may include a failure to act or an ongoing state of affairs (e.g. possession of drugs, being drunk and incapable in a public place).
What is the difference between conduct crimes and results crimes?
Conduct crimes criminalise an act – eg dangerous driving, possession of firearms. Result crimes criminalise the consequences of an act – eg dangerous driving causing death, murder.
Name the six circumstances in which an act of omission may give rise to liability.
(i) Special relationship between accused and victim
(ii) Voluntary assumption of responsibility
(iii) Creation of a danger
(iv) Duty under contract
(v) Misconduct of an officer of justice
(vi) Statutory duty to act
R v Nichols (1874)
If a grown-up chooses to undertake the charge of a human creature and then lets it die by their negligence, that person is guilty of manslaughter
R v Gibbons and Proctor (1919)
Nellie Gibbons starved to death by father’s girlfriend. Starving was intentional: girlfriend was given money to feed Nellie, but girlfriend (Proctor) refused to feed child out of hatred. Proctor found guilty (of manslaughter because of the special relationship between her and the child, which she had voluntarily assumed.
R v Stone and Dobinson (1977)
Stone (age 67, partially deaf and totally blind) and Dobinson (age 43 girlfriend, some kind of cognitive disability) lived together. Stone’s sister, Fanny, came to stay. She locked herself in her room and appears to have suffered from some kind of anorexia. She refused to eat and eventually died. Stone was held responsible because of blood relation to Fanny and Dobinson because she assumed responsibility in her attempted to bathe and feed Fanny. While they did “make efforts to care” they should have done more. Guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.
Case established there is an objective standard of care to meet, apparently regardless of whether or not one is able to meet that standard.
R v Miller (1983)
Example of omission - creation of a danger.
Man experiencing homelessness fell asleep while smoking and then left smoldering mattress to sleep in another room. House then burned down.
R v Pittwood (1902)
Example of omission - duty under contract
Railway employee failed to perform one of his job duties (close a gate). As a result, someone died.
R v Dythan (1979)
Example of omission - misconduct of an officer of justice
Police officer saw man being beaten outside of a club while on duty and did nothing. Did not have to physically intervene, but could have called for help.
DPP v Bartley (1997)
Carney J obiter: “A failure to carry out this duty vigorously constitutes an illegality on the policeman’s part and renders him liable to prosecution on indictment.” Case where young woman was molested for ages and Gardai ignored her/made fun of her.
Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 - s.9
(1) A person shall be guilty of an offence if he or she has information which he or she knows or believes might be of material assistance in—
(a) preventing the commission by any other person of a serious offence, or
(b) securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any other person for a serious offence,
and fails without reasonable excuse to disclose that information as soon as it is practicable to a member of the Garda Síochána.
(EXAMPLE OF STATUTORY DUTY TO ACT)
P McCutcheon, “Omissions and Criminal Liability” - What are the two suggestions the author gives on how Irish law can better address the general duty to act?
- Statutory rescue duty (good samaritan laws)
- Judicially/legislatively expand scope of crimes which can be committed by ommission
A . Ashworth “The Scope of Criminal Liability for Omissions” - What are the two contrasting positions posed by Ashworth on omissions?
- Conventional view: Criminal law should be reluctant to impose liability for omissions except in clear and serious cases. (Protective of negative liberty - the freedom NOT to do something.)
- Social responsibility view: It is fair to require citizens to act in some limited and specific situations. (Individual autonomy should not be celebrated as a supreme value.
