Chapter One- Acts Reus

Question 1

What are the three components required to establish criminal liability?

Answer 1

Actus Reus
Mens Rea
Absence of any valid defence

Question 2

What is the Actus Reus?

Answer 2

Guilty conduct by the defendant.
The Acts Reus of every offence is different and can be found either in statute or in the common law.
It is the guilty act.

Question 3

What is the Mens Rea?

Answer 3

Guilty state of mind of the defendant.

Question 4

Who determines the defendant’s guilt?

Answer 4

Determined in a court of law by the magistrates or a jury who assess the evidence put before them.

Question 5

Who has the legal burden of proof?

Answer 5

The legal burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove all of the elements of the offence, including disproving the evidence

Question 6

Who has the evidential burden of proof?

Answer 6

The evidential burden is on the prosecution to provide sufficient evidence for each element of the offence.

Question 7

What is the standard of proof?

Answer 7

For the prosecution it is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
For the Defendant it is ON THE BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES.

Question 8

In what rare situations does the LEGAL burden of proof fall to the defendant?

Answer 8

The partial defence to murder of diminished responsibility

Question 9

How can the defence satisfy their evidential burden?

Answer 9

They must show sufficient evidence to enable them to rely on a defence, which the prosecution must then disprove.
The defence must raise some evidence to make the issue ‘live’.
This can be done by the defendant giving evidence or by cross-examining a witness.

Question 10

What components may the AR consist of?

Answer 10

An act, or a failure to act but the defendant, (CONDUCT crimes)
Certain consequences flowing from the defendant’s conduct (RESULT crimes)
The existence of certain circumstances at the time of the defendant’s conduct (CIRCUMSTANCES/ STATE OF AFFAIRS crimes)

Question 11

What is a conduct crime?

Answer 11

Usually involves an act but may include an omission to act. ‘Doing offences’ Eg, perjury.
The conduct must be voluntary if it is to be criminal. But are rare circumstances where the defendant may act involuntarily, (road accident)

Question 12

What is a result crime?

Answer 12

A result must have been caused by the conduct of the defendant. Proof of causation is required. Eg, murder and criminal damage.

Question 13

What are circumstance/ state of affairs crime?

Answer 13

The existence of a set of circumstances or a ‘state of affairs’

Question 14

What is an omission?

Answer 14

A failure to act
The general rule for omissions is the there is no criminal liability.
Just because someone may be under a moral duty does not mean that they are under a legal duty.
Exceptions: statutory offences and common law offences. Common law offences meaning where the law recognises that they were under a duty to act, eg doctor and nurses, parents, lifeguards.
Dangerous situations- where someone creates a dangerous situation to endanger the victim and are aware of it they are under an obligation to act and should take reasonable steps to avert it.

Question 15

What is meant by causation?

Answer 15

The accused’s act or omission actually caused the prohibited consequence.

Question 16

What are the two types of causation?

Answer 16

Factual and Legal
Both must be present in order for causation to be established as part of the AR.

Question 17

What is factual causation?

Answer 17

The principle that the defendant cannot be considered to be the cause of an event if the event would have occurred in precisely the same way without the defendant’s act or omission.

Question 18

What is the test for factual causation?

Answer 18

The BUT FOR test.
But for the defendant’s conduct, would the consequence have occurred?
If the result would have occurred irrespective of the defendant’s conduct, then factual causation is not established.

Question 19

What is legal causation?

Answer 19

The defendant’s conduct must be s substantial and operating cause of the consequence.

Question 20

What are the five rules of legal causation?

Answer 20

The consequences must be attributable to a culpable act or omission- someone must be blameworthy.
The culpable act must be a more than minimal cause of the consequence - the prosecution must show that the defendants contribution is more than trivial or minimal.
The culpable act need not be the sole cause
The accused must take their victims they find them- the thin skull rule.
The chain of causation must not be broken- novas acts, (new and intervening act’.

Question 21

What are three intervening acts or events that may break the chain of causation?

Answer 21

• Where the victim acts in a particular way
• Where an act by some other son intervenes between the defendant’s conduct and the result; or
• Where some event occurs between the defendant’s conduct and the end result.

Question 22

What are victims acts that may break the chain of causation?

Answer 22

Escape- When considering escape, the court will consider how foreseeable the victim’s response was. A defendant will not always be liable for the consequences of a victim’s escape ‘if the victims act was ‘so daft’ as to make it the victims own voluntary act’ then the chain of causation would be broken.
Suicide

Question 23

How does third party intervention break the chain of causation?

Answer 23

Where someone other than the victim or the defendant acts.
A defendant will not be liable if a third party’s intervening act is either free, deliberate and informed, or is not reasonably foreseeable.
Medical negligence may break the chain but only in extraordinary cases.

Question 24

How do intervening acts break the chain of causation?

Answer 24

A natural event may break the chain of causation with the foreseeability of the subsequent event being the determining factor.
The chain of causation may also break by events other than natural ones, eg gas explosions.