concepts

Question 1

actus reus

Answer 1

conduct, result, state of affairs, omission

Question 2

mens rea

Answer 2

direct intention “decision to bring about a prohibited consequence” ( R v Mohan)=must be established for serious crimes like murder and gbh

Oblique intention is virtual certainty (R v Woolin)

Recklessness is deliberate risk taking (R v G+R)

Question 3

factual causation (criminal)

Answer 3

but for test (R v White)

Question 4

legal causation (criminal)

Answer 4

operating and substantial cause (R v Smith)

novus actus interveniens intervening act that is unforeseeable breaks chain (R v Pagett)

victims intervening act will not break chain if foreseeable (R v Roberts)

“palpably wrong” medical treatment will break chain (R v Jordan)

think skull rule (R v Blaue)

Question 5

Duty

Answer 5

statutory=legal duty

contractual duty (R v Pitwood)

duty imposed by law=
a. not fixing dangerous situation that you create (R v winter+winter)
b. assume responsibility (R v Stone + Dobinson)
c. misconduct in public office= omission can still create guilt for this crime (R v
Dytham)
d. Special relationship eg. family (R v Lowe) (R v Evans)

Question 6

omission can be a continuing act

Answer 6

( Fagan v MPC)

Question 7

Transferred malice

Answer 7

still guilty as mens rea transfers (R v Mitchell) (R v Latimer)

Question 8

continuing act theory

Answer 8

defendant commits actus reus then develops mens rea (Fagan v MPC)

Question 9

Transaction theory

Answer 9

believes to have killed the victim but actually kills them when disposing of the body (R v Church) (Thabo-Meli v R)

Question 10

strict liability

Answer 10

do not need to prove mens rea as the fact the outcome occured is enough