AR

Question 1

What is the actus reus ?

Answer 1

The physical element

Question 2

If the act is committed lawfully then there is no AR and therefor no crime. Give examples of lawful wound or GBH.

Answer 2

• Self defence (reasonable force)
• Surgery / Medical procedures
• Dental work
• Tattoos / Piercings
• Vaccine

Question 3

The prosecution must prove that oh he accused VOLUNTARILY brought about the AR of the crime…

Answer 3

The act or omission must have occurred bc of the conscious exercise or will on the part of the accused.

Question 4

Crimes can be divided into 4 types depending on how the Actus Reus is committed. Name the 4.

Answer 4

Conduct crimes
Consequence crimes
Circumstance crimes
Crimes committed by omission - Failing to act

Question 5

Define Conduct Crimes with examples

Answer 5

• Dangerous driving
• possession of drugs

Question 6

Define consequence crimes with examples

Answer 6

Necessary to show the result of consequence of the action so it can be assessed.
- Murder : dead body
- Death by dangerous driving : dead body

Question 7

Define circumstance crimes with examples

Answer 7

These are the ‘BEING’ rather than ‘DOING’ offences. D could be found guilty of a crime simply by being in a particular place when this state of affairs has been declared illegal.
eg; driving dangerously is only an offence if it is on a public highway

Question 8

Define crimes committed by omission with examples

Answer 8

POL: It is a general principle of English Law that you cannot commit the AR of a crime by failing to do something
eg; If you do nothing to help a drowning man you have not committed a crime. No criminal liability

Question 9

Name the 6 situations where the OMISSION (failing to act) is the AR of the offence.

Answer 9

1) Duty to act where statue lays this down:
Road traffic Act 1988. Children’s & Young Person Act 1933
2) Where there is a duty under a contract to act: Life guard
3) D can have a duty through their status of position: Sea captains must take reasonable steps to protect lives of passengers. Police.
4) Duty because of a relationship: Father deliberately starved his 7 year old daughter to death
5) Voluntary assumed responsibility: R V EVANS
6) Duty of care bc D caused a dangerous situation and D has failed to put it right: MILLER 1983

Question 10

Once it has been established that you had a DUTY TO ACT then the following questions have to be asked

Answer 10

• Did the D breach his duty of care to the V
• Did the breach CAUSE the consequence

Question 11

First sentence to write in exam about AR

Answer 11

Causation establishes if the defendant has committed the ACTUS REUS of the offence.

Question 12

If the AR of a crime requires prohibited consequence (eg death in a murder or harm in ABHJ) it must be established that the suspects conduct is a:

Answer 12

1) FACTUAL
2) LEGAL CAUSE OF CONSEQUENCE

Question 13

Factual cause of consequence: But-for-test (WHITE)

Answer 13

“But for the actions of the accused would the consequences have happened at that time?”
If the answer is YES then D is NOT A FACTUAL CAUSE
If the answer is NO then D is a FACTUAL CAUSE

Question 14

Legal cause of the consequence - 2nd test

Answer 14

The Jury must be convinced that D is to blame and his actions or omissions are more than a minimal cause of the consequence even when other people have contributed (THE DE MINIMUS RULE)
Decided in KIMSEY

Question 15

Novus actus interveniens

Answer 15

D will not be a legal cause if something happens after his initial act but before the consequence. To break the chain of causation it must be SO SUBSTANTIAL OR SIGNIFICANTLY DEPENDANT that is takes over as the new cause and breaks the chain of causation.
Have to decide if the act or event is substantial or significantly independent enough to do this

Question 16

Intervening act of Medical Practitioners

Answer 16

“Will D still be liable for murder or manslaughter if the V receives bad medical treatment or even negligent treatment after the initial act?”
R V SMITH
R V CHESHIRE
contrast with
R V JORDAN

Question 17

Intervening actions by the victim

Answer 17

If the v of the offence has acted in a way that has contributed to his or her injury the attacker will still be cause of the Vs actions were a REASONABLY FORESEEABLE REACTION TO THE ACTIONS OF THE ATTACKER.
R v Roberts 1972
compare that ^ with - R v Williams

Question 18

Intervening actions by 3rd parties

Answer 18

If actions of a third party are reasonably foreseeable then there is NO break in the chain of causation
R V PAGETT 1983

Question 19

Self - neglect / refusal of treatment / aggravate injuries

Answer 19

HOLLAND 1841
R V BLAUE