Chapt 5 Cases/ Statute (attempts)

Question 1

Actus Reus of attempt

3 factors

Answer 1

S1(1) says it must be an act not a omission

Must be more than preparatory (Jones 1990)
But not Campbell

Must be an indictable or either way offence
(can’t be a summary offence)

Question 2

Whybrow 1986

Answer 2

MR of attempt/ intent to commit

Case: D wired up bath to electrocute his wife. She got into bath but somehow survived.

PoL:
Must intend the consequence specified in the Actus Reus ie must intend murder not GBH in this case.
The MR of attempt it’s an attempt to commit to the full offence but it is not clear whether there must be direct intent whether indirect intent would do (i.e. foresight Woollin 1998)

Question 3

Actus Reus of attempt

Jones 1990

Answer 3

Actus Reus of attempt

Jones 1990

Case: held to have committed attempted murder by taking a swan off shot gun, hatchet and cord. Got into vs car, pointed gun at v. V escaped.

PoL:
D had performed sufficient acts that were more than “merely preparatory”

Question 4

The offence of attempt definition

Answer 4

S1(1) criminal attempts act 1981

” with intent to commit (any offence triable On indictment or either way), a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence”

Therefore attempt requires proof that d…

• act more than merely preparatory,
• to the commission of the full offence
• with intent to commit that offence

Question 5

What is the mens rea of attempt?

Answer 5

Intention to carry out the full offence. Can be inferred from foresight of consequences.

There must be intent, recklessness not enough
But can be reckless as to circs

Must intend the consequences of the substantive offence ( whybrow 1956)- not clear whether he just wanted GBH

Can intend the impossible (shivpuri 1986)

Question 6

Campbell 1991

Answer 6

Actus Reus of attempt/ more than merely preparatory

Case: D arrested with initiation firearm. Intended to rob PO but arrested before he got there. He said he had changed his mind. Not guilty.

PoL:
Had not embarked on the “crime proper”. Actions were “merely preparatory”

Question 7

Shivpuri 1986

Answer 7

MR of attempt/ “attempting the impossible”

Case: d Believed he was acting as a drug courier when in fact substance turned out to be a harmless vegetable substance. Guilty

Pol:
S1(2) CAA 1981: “D May be guilty of an attempt if he did an act more than merely preparatory even though the commission of the offence is impossible”

Question 8

S1(1) criminal attempts act 1981

Answer 8

Says that:
“With intent to commit( any offence triable on indictment or either way) a person does a act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence”
Therefore, P will need to prove that D..

• act more than merely preparatory
  To the commission of the full offence
  With intent to commit the full offence