C2: Principles of criminal liability Flashcards
Where do all offences come from?
Either statute or common law.
What does ‘actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea’ means?
‘An act does not make a person legally guilty unless the mind is also legally blameworthy.’
In most criminal offences, it is not enough for the defendant to merely do something wrong. What else must they have?
A blameworthy state of mind at the relevant time.
What are the two essential elements to a criminal offence?
Actus reus (AR) - guilty act
Mens rea (MR) - guilty mind
What is the best way to describe the actus rea?
The AR of an offence consists of all the physical elements of the offence that the prosecution has to prove, according to the definition of the offence.
What are the three elements to an AR?
- Conduct element - defendant committing a positive act, or occasionally an omission.
- Results element - must cause certain results or consequences
- Circumstance element - surrounding circumstances, e.g. victim is living human being or property belongs to another person.
What are the two types of crimes that criminal offences can be divided into? Give an example for each.
- Conduct crimes, i.e. perjury (which don’t need a specific result to come about and don’t have the result element)
- Result crimes, i.e murder (where a life is taken)
What are the offences called that do not require any mens rea?
Strict liability offences.
As well as the AR and MR, what is the final requirement for there to be criminal liability?
The defendant must be unable to raise a defence.
How can the actus rea and mens rea be discovered?
By looking at the definition of the offence. E.g. Murder ‘the unlawful killing of another human being within the Queen’s peace, with malice aforethought’. Amongst other words included in the definition, killing would be actus rea, malice aforethought would be mens rea.
What is a thought crime?
It is a mens rea without an actus rea. It does not exist. Every criminal offence has an actus rea.
Can an omission count as ‘conduct’?
Yes, although English and Welsh criminal law does not include a general duty to act, there can be instances where an omission can make them criminally liable for their failure to intervene, e.g. having a special relationship/closeness with a drowning child.
Which criminal offence definitely cannot be caused by omission?
Manslaughter - the defendant must commit a positive act to be convicted.
Obtaining services dishonestly as well.
Explain Miller [1983] and its effect on the law around omissions of acts for actus reus?
In Miller [1983], the defendant was living in an unoccupied building. One night, the defendant had fallen asleep while holding a lighted cigarette. At some point, he dropped the lighted cigarette on to the mattress which caught fire. When the defendant woke up and realised what happened, he decided to move to another part of the building, doing nothing about the fire. The fire caused damaged to the building and the defendant was charged with arson contrary to s1(1) and (3) Criminal Damage Act 1971. The case eventually went to the House of Lords which held that the defendant ‘had a duty reasonably to prevent that fire from spreading’. If, for instance, when the defendant woke up the fire was already out of control, it would be unreasonable to expect him to deal with it on his own. In this case, though, the defendant could still have called the fire brigade or asked for some help in order to prevent further damage to the building. Consequently, whether the defendant breached his duty to act will depend heavily on the facts of the case.
Why do we not generally criminalise defendants who merely fail to act?
Imposing a general duty to act would put a heavy burden on citizens, who are arguably less blameworthy than when the result is caused by a positive act. Also, rescuers can often make things worse!
When do we generally criminalise defendants who fail to act?
When they are under a legal duty to act, e.g. special relationship or in those cases where an omission was as deserving of criminal liability as a positive act.
What is an example of some statute where there is an offence for failing to act?
Refusing to give a specimen of breath to a police officer, or not stopping to give details on a road traffic accident. (Road Traffic Act 1988)
Can a duty to act arise from a contract? Provide an example where an omission to act was an offence due to a contractual duty to act.
Yes it can, e.g. Pittwood [1902] when an employee left the gate open at a level crossing and a victim was killed by an oncoming train - it was in his contract that shutting the gate was his job.
Can a duty to act arise in a special relationship between the defendant and victim? Provide an example.
Hood [2004] where the defendant, a carer for his wife, did not call an ambulance when his wife fell and broke her leg and hip until 3 weeks later. She then died in hospital due to the low standard of care provided by the defendant, who had a duty of care to his wife.
Explain where a duty to act arose in Airedale National Health Service Trust v Bland [1993] and why an omission to act was not an offence?
In this case, Anthony Bland, a victim of the Hillsborough stadium disaster, had been in a persistent vegetative state for three years. There was no hope of improvement or recovery. The victim’s parents wanted to allow their son to die peacefully and applied for a declaration that they might discontinue ventilation, nutrition, hydration and medical care (other than that necessary to allow their son to die peacefully). It was held that if, having regard to responsible and competent medical opinion, it was no longer in the best interests of the patient to be kept alive, the doctors would be relieved of their duty to act.
Can a police officer be criminally liable when they fail to intervene in a crime when on duty?
Yes, in Dythan [1979], when a police constable on duty was held to have committed an offence when he knowingly failed to intervene when the victim was ejected from a nightclub and beaten to death by a ‘bouncer’.
Can a duty arise from an omission when the defendant voluntarily assumes responsibility for a person or situation? Provide an example.
Yes, see Stone and Dobinson [1977] where both defendants took on responsibility for Stone’s anorexic sister through making ineffectual efforts to contact a doctor for her. They were convicted due to being in breach of a duty to act, i.e. caring for the victim and preventing her death due to infected bedsores.
Is there a legal duty to rescue a person in distress?
No, there is not.
What happens if someone attempts to rescue a person in distress and makes the situation worse?
They often will have a duty of care to the victim as a result of their voluntary assumption of responsibility.