Actus reus, mens rea and strict liability Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

The actus reus of an offence must be v______ (M______)

A

Voluntary, (Mitchell)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Which duty situation does the case of Pittwood demonstrate?

A

Contractual duty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Which case(s) demonstrate the duty of ‘creation of a dangerous situation and failure to minimise harmful consequences?

A

Miller, Santa-Bermudez

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What happened in Gibbins & Proctor and what duty situation did this fall under?

A

They deliberately stopped feeding their child - special relationships

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is a ‘state of affairs’ crime?

A

Where there is an involuntary act and there is no mens rea present

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What happened in Larsonneur?

A

French woman was deported against her will from Ireland to England and charged with ‘being an illegal alien’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

How is specific intention described in Mohan?

A

‘A decision to bring about the prohibited consequence’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Oblique intention: where D i______ the act but not the c________; evidence from which s____ i_____ can be i_____

A

Intends, consequences, specific intention, inferred

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What happened in the case of Matthews & Alleyne?

A

The two Ds threw V into a river, knowing he could not swim, who then drowned

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What does Matthews & Alleyne tell us about the jury’s role in inferring oblique intention

A

A jury may infer specific intention - they are not required to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Which case shows that the ‘thin-skull’ rule is not an intervening act?

A

Ruby

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What does Malcherek tell us about the switching off of life support?

A

It does not break the chain of causation if the brain stem is dead

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What rule do we get from Roberts and Williams & Davis about escape cases?

A

Escape does not break the chain unless it is ‘so daft as to be unforeseeable’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

In which case(s) does the refusal of medical treatment not break the chain of causation?

A

Blaue, Holland

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What happened in Pagett? And why does this not break the chain?

A

D used his girlfriend as a shield against gunfire from the police - her death was a natural consequence of D’s actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

When will poor medical treatment break the chain?

A

It must be ‘palpably wrong’ (Jordan) or ‘so extraordinary’ (Cheshire) as to be unforeseeable

17
Q

The continuing act principle: where the a____ r___ is continuing and at some point the m___ r__ is formed (F___)

A

Actus reus, mens rea, (Fagan)

18
Q

Strict liability does not require p___ of fault with respect to some or all of the a___ r___ (L____ & G__ N__ Ltd.)

A

Proof, actus reus, (Lemon & Gay News Ltd.)

19
Q

What is disregarded in strict liability offences?

A

Intention/mens rea

20
Q

What happened in Callow v Tillstone?

A

D was liable for selling unfit meat even though it had been checked over by a vet