actus reus/mens rea/definitions Flashcards
assault mens rea
the defendant intended or was reckless that the victim would apprehend imminent unlawful force.
assault actus reus
the defendant caused the victim to apprehend imminent unlawful violence.
battery/assault defintion
a criminal offense involving unlawful physical contact
battery actus reus
the defendant touched or applied force to the victim.
battery mens rea
involves either intention or recklessness as to the application of force
what is battery and assault under
s39 c and ja act 1988
what is gbh under
offences against the persons act
what is gbh s20
GBH or grievous bodily harm is really serious bodily harm can include physcriatric injury
what is s18 oapa
gbh with intent - life imprisonment
inent to cause serious injury/harm or wounding is required
what is s20 oapa
did not intend to cause gbh or cause harm
gbh s218 mens rea
the defendant intended to cause grievous bodily harm
gbh s20 mens rea (wounding without intent)
the defendant intended to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension of any person.
gbh actus reus
the defendant unlawfully either wounded the victim or inflicted grievous bodily harm to the victim
it is not necessary to show that the defendant intended or foresaw that the victim would suffer grievous bodily harm.
abh defintion
Assault occasioning Actual Bodily Harm statutory offence
abh actus reus
the defendant must commit an assault or battery which causes the victim to suffer actual bodily harm.
abh mens rea
the defendant must intend or be reckless as to the assault or battery.
difference between murder and voluntary manslaughter
Murder Requires Malice Aforethought, Meaning The Perpetrator Intended To Cause Death Or Serious Harm, While Manslaughter Involves An Unlawful Killing Without Malice Aforethought.
mens rea for murder
intention to kill or cause gbh
Mens Rea For Murder Generally Consists Of The Intention To Kill, Intention To Cause Grievous Bodily Harm That Results In Death, To Human Life, Where The Perpetrator Is Aware That Their Actions Could Cause Death But Proceeds Anyway.
actus reus of murder
the unlawful killing of another person in the Queen’s peace
An Act Or Omission By The Perpetrator, That Directly Caused The Victim’s Death, And There Was No Intervening Act Or Event That Broke The Chain Of Causation Between The Perpetrator’s Act Or Omission And The Victim’s Death.
what is murder under
common law offence
defined by Lord Coke in 1797 as an “unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being under the Queen’s peace, with malice aforethought, express or implied”.
malice aforethought meaning
the intention to cause harm. For the offence of murder, the intention can either be “express” (to cause death) or “implied” (to cause Grievous Bodily Harm).
expressed malice aforethought
Express malice is when a defendant had the specific intent to kill the victim
implied malice
Implied malice is when the accused demonstrated a conscious disregard for human life
what is causation
Causation is the relationship between the defendant and their conduct. It involves what they caused to happen and the end result - this will form the basis of whether the defendant is to blame whilst in court.
more than de minimus
when a defendants actions are more than significant to be considered as substantial/relevant
used when considering liability
new intervening act
breaks chain of causation
how can the sentence be reduced from murder to voluntary manslaughter
can utilise 2 partial defences Dr and loss of control
what is dr and lol under
homocide act 1957
what was dr an lol reformed by
c and ja act 2009
Dr elements
Abnormality of mental functioning,
caused by a recognised medical condition,
substantially impaired
explanation for the defendant’s conduct
what must be substantially impaired
Understand the nature of their conduct
Form a rational judgement
Exercise self-control
who is the burdern of proof on in dr
the burden of proof is on the defendant
what was abnormality of mental functioning previosly
abnormality of mind- upated law for a more widened defintion
what defence did dr replace
insanity- social stigma
lol elements
qualifying trigger eg things said or done or fear of violence
loss of self control( does not have to be sudden) R v aluwaliha
A person of D’s same sex and age,, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D.
things said or done
circumstances must be extremely graved or have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
voluntary/involuntary intoxication
voluntary- d voluntarily intoxicated themselves
involuntary- unwillingly was intoxicated
what is self defence
A man who is attacked or believes that he is about to be attacked may use such force as is both necessary and reasonable in order to defend himself.
force must be porporionate
implied consent
where consent is assumed such as in contact sports R v barnes
problems with consent
difficult to determine if defendants believe is genuine
consent defintion
a person voluntarily and willfully agrees in response to another person’s proposition.
must have the mental capacity
problems with self defence
-jury decide which makes it inconsistent
Geniune belief of defendant R v martin-difficult to determine what defendants geniune belief is.
Objective test
if to much force is used defence fails even if there was a genuine belief
