Actus Reus - Criminal Conduct Flashcards
define causal link or chain of causation
once the actus reus is complete you must prove causal link to the consequences. Sometimes delays occur between the act and consequences
Principals and Accessories.
what is an accessory?
A principal offender is one whose conduct has met all the requirements of the particular offence. An accessory is 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 or for a summary offence
Principals and Accessories.
describe the differences between aids, abets, counsels or procures
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.
These last two activities would generally be expected to take place before the commission of the offence.
Principals and Accessories.
what are the points to prove when prosecuting an accessory who was not present during the act? (5 points)
the prosecution must prove:
- an ACT done by D;
- which in fact ASSISTED the later commission of the offence;
- that D did the act DELIBERATLEY 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.
Generally, the state of mind (mens rea) which is needed to convict an accessory is: ‘proof of intention to aid as well as of knowledge of the circumstances’’
Principals and Accessories.
What’s the difference between counselling and procuring?
‘Counselling’ an offence requires no causal link.
As long as the principal offender is aware of the ‘counsellor’s’ advice or encouragement, the latter will be guilty as an accessory, even if the principal would have committed the offence anyway.
‘Procuring’, you must show a causal link between his/her conduct and the offence
Principals and Accessories.
do you need a principle offender identified to prosecute an accessory?
No.
an accessory may be convicted of procuring an offence even though the principal is acquitted or has a defence for his/her actions. This is because the principal often supplies the actus reus for the accessory’s offence. If the accessory also has the required mens rea, the offence will be complete and should not be affected by the fact that there is some circumstance or characteristic preventing the principal from being prosecuted
Principals and Accessories.
who is protected from being an accessory?
- In the absence of some overwhelming supervening event, an accessory can only avoid liability for assistance rendered to the principal offender towards the commission of the crime by acting in a way that amounts to the countermanding of any earlier assistance, such as a withdrawal from the common purpose. Repentance alone will not be enough.
- A person whom the law is intended to protect from certain types of offence cannot be an accessory to such offences committed against them. For example, a girl under 16 years of age is protected from people having sexual intercourse with her. If a 15-year-old girl allows someone to have sexual intercourse with her, she cannot be charged as an accessory to the offence
Describe Actus Reus, what do you need to prove?
(5 points)
For a person to be found guilty of a criminal offence you must show that he/she:
acted in a particular way;
failed to act in a particular way (omissions); or
brought about a state of affairs.
This is the actus reus of an offence, i.e. the behavioural element of an offence. When proving the required actus reus, you must show:
that the defendant’s conduct was voluntary; and
that it occurred while the defendant still had the requisite mens rea.
Voluntary Acts
give an example
a voluntary act is something done by the defendant, whereas an involuntary act is something that happens to a defendant.
example:
If a person is shoved into a shop window, he/she cannot be said to be guilty of criminal damage even though he/she was the immediate physical cause of the damage. Similarly, if a person was standing in front of a window waiting to break it and someone came up and pushed that person into the window, the presence of the requisite mens rea would still not be enough to attract criminal liability for the damage.
voluntary acts
give defences to this
when defendants have lost control of their own physical actions. Reflexive actions are generally not classed as being willed or voluntary, hence the (limited) availability of the ‘defence’ of automatism.
the unexpected onset of a sudden physical impairment (such as severe cramp when driving, actions when sleepwalking) can also render any linked actions ‘involuntary’.
1.3.4 Coincidence with Mens Rea
describe the state of changing your mind in relation to actus reus
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. 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.
likewise, if the act is being committed and the D changes his mind to INTENT that offence to occur that person is guilty.
Omissions
when can you be liable for a criminal offence if you fail to act? (Hint DUTY)
Dangerous situation created by the defendant.
Under statute, contract or a person’s public ‘office’.
eg. Statue - failing to provide or stop.
eg. Contract - failing to follow H&S rules.
eg. Public office - police failing to stop an assault.
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.
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.
The defence is if the D has limited physical capability to omit from the offence. eg. cant swim so cannot save a drowning person
Intervening Act
describe
The causal link can be broken by a new intervening act provided that the ‘new’ act is ‘free, deliberate and informed’. The basic rule is that an intervening act will not generally break the causal link/chain of causation
eg. drug dealers are not responsible for drug overdoses due to the drug takers exercise for free will. Unless you can prove the dealer assisted, encouraged or facilitated the taking of the drug. the victim must have an informed choice.
Intervening Act
what other circumstances can D be held responsible
(around victims acts and acts of god)
victims actions: eg a victim is injured when fleeing.
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
acts of god:
If the defendant attacks his/her victim and leaves him slowly dying of his injuries, then the chain of causation may be broken if the victim is ultimately killed by a lightning bolt or a falling tree, rather than the original injuries. In contrast, routine hazards, such as seasonal rain or cold winter nights, would not have such an effect
1.3.8.2 Joint Enterprise
describe
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.
