Actus Reus Result Crimes Causation Flashcards
Disclaimer: You will only need to know about result crimes as that constitutes murder.
What is a result crime?
The Actus Reus must result in a certain ‘outcome’, e.g the V must die for there to be the Actus Reus of murder
This requires Causation to be established
What is the Chain of causation?
Where:
Factual Causation and Legal causation must be established
(FC + LC)
What is Factual Causation?
If the outcome would have happened regardless of D’s conduct, D is not the cause.
“But for” the D’s conduct, would the outcome not have occurred?
Factual Causation
R V White
D Put cyanide in his mother’s lemonade.
Although she took a sip and or two, she died of a heart attack that was unrelated to this.
It ‘could not be said’/ that she would have died “but for” the D’s conduct
Therefore there was ‘no factual causation’.
What is Legal Causation?
D’s conduct need not be the sole or even the main cause of the outcome
Legal Causation
R V Benge (1846)
A railway worker took up a section of the line.
He misread the timetable and the line was still taken up when the train arrived.
Workers displayed warning flags incorrectly, and the driver was not keeping a proper look-out.
A fatal accident resulted
Held:
If D’s conduct ‘substantially caused’ the accident, the presence of other causes was irrelevant.
Legal Causation
R V Hennigan (1971)
D was convicted of dangerous driving.
The trial Judge told hem they could convict if the D’s conduct was a ‘substantial cause of the death’
Lord Parker in the Court Of Appeal made it clear that this was not correct
The Supreme Court in R V Hughes (2013) confirmed that D’s conduct only needed to be ‘“more than a minimal cause” of the outcome
Causation
Novus Actus Interveneus
R V Smith (Case can be used in Legal Causation)
Two soldiers from different regiments had a fight.
D stabbed the V in the back with a Bayonet
On the way to the medical station, the V was dropped twice, creating a delay.
Doctors gave the wrong treatment by resuscitating the V who had a punctured lung
Held: As the D stabbing the V was “more than a minimal cause” of the V’s death
Causation
Novus Actus Interveneus
R V Pagett
D used a girl as a shield and shot at armed policeman.
the policemen instinctively fired back, killing the girl.
Held:
the chain of causation was “not broken” and D was liable for manslaughter of the girl.
A human intervention that is foreseeable, instinctively done and for self-preservation will not break the chain.
Legal Causation summarised
D’s conduct must be “more than the minimal cause” of the outcome
How can Medical Negligence be proved?
It will not break the chain of causation unless:
“it can be described as extraordinary or unusual”
Medical Negligence
R V Cheshire wi
D shot V in the thigh and the stomach
Doctors put a tube into V’s throat to help him breathe
This was done negligently and D had become infected
V died
Held:
The gunshot wounds inflicted by the D were a “significant cause” of V’s death
Medical negligence will not break the chain unless it is so independent of D’s acts , and in itself “so potent”, that the jury regard the contribution made by D as insignificant
This will only be in the most “Extraordinary and unusual” circumstances
Medical Negligence
R V Jordan (Where the chain of causation was broken)
D stabbed V.
In hospital, V’s wounds had mostly healed.
Even though V had already shown intolerance to it, he was given a second large does of antibiotics, and died.
Held:
As the treatment was “palpably wrong” and the wounds were almost healed, it could not be said that the stab wound was “more than a minimal cause of the death”. the Chain of causation was broken and D was not liable for V’s death
Legal Causation
Medical Negligence (Summarised)
Medical negligence does not break the chain unless the treatment was
“Extraordinarily and unusually wrong”
Pre-existing condition (Legal Causation)
R V Blaue
D stabbed a young girl with a knife
The stabbing pierced her lung, and she required a blood transfusion.
She refused to have one as it was against her religious beliefs, and died the next day.
Held:
“The question for decision is what caused her death. The answer is the stab wound.
The fact the V refused to stop this end coming about did not break the chain of causation”
“It has long been the policy of the law that those who use violence on other people must “take their victim as they find them”. In our judgement this means the whole ,man, not the physical man”.
