Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law Paper 1 > CRIME Criminal Rules > Flashcards

CRIME Criminal Rules Flashcards

1
Q

What is Actus Reus?

A

Guilty act of the defendant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is conduct crimes?

A

To prove the AR is not necessary for any consequence to be proved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Examples for conduct crimes

A

Drink driving
Theft
Battery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is consequence crimes?

A

To prove the AR the prohibited conduct must also result in a consequence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Examples for consequence crimes

A

Assault causing actual bodily harm

Murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is a state of affairs crimes?

A

To prove the AR there must be a state of affairs the D is responsible for

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Examples of state of affairs crimes

A

Possession of offensive weapon in a public area- D does not need to do anything with the weapon and it does not need to be visible

Possession of a controlled drug - doesn’t matter if D is going to use the drug

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Voluntary Nature of AR

A

Act or omission must be voluntary, If D has no control over his actions then he has not committed AR

Hill v Baxter

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Involuntariness of AR

A

Where D can be convicted even though he didn’t act voluntarily - usually involve state of affairs crimes

R v Larsonneur

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

General Rule

A

Usually a person is not liable for omissions (failure to act) as there would be no AR - guilty act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Exceptions where there is a duty to act are….

A

A statutory duty
A contractual duty
A duty because of a relationship

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Omissions - A statutory duty

A

An act of parliament can create liability for an omission

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Example for a statutory duty …

A

S.170 Road traffic act 1988

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Omissions - A contractual Duty

A

D will have a duty to act if it is part of his contract, if he fails to act this could form the AR of an offence

R v Pittwood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Omissions - A duty because of a relationship

A

D will have a duty to act if it is part of a relationship with V, if he fails to act this could form the AR of the offence

R v Gibbins and Proctor

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Omissions - A duty which has been taken on voluntarily

A

D will have a duty to act if he voluntarily takes in a duty, if he fails to act to fulfil that duty properly ; this could form the AR of an offence

R v Stone and Dobinson

17
Q

Omissions - A duty through an official position

A

D will have a duty to act when it is part of his public position, if he fails to act this could form the AR of an offence

18
Q

Omissions - A duty by creation of a dangerous situation

A

D will have a duty to act when he becomes aware of a dangerous situation that he has created, if he fails to act this could form the AR of the offence

R v Miller

19
Q

Problem of causation

A

For consequence crimes, we have to show that D’s act CAUSED a particular consequence

20
Q

Factual Causation

A

D is only guilty if the consequence would not have happened “but for “ his act

White & Pagett

21
Q

Legal Causation

A

Link between D’s act and the consequence is the “chain of causation” and must remain unbroken

D’s act must be the “operating and substantial cause” of the consequence

R v Smith

22
Q

Novus Actus interveniens of Third Party

A

A third party does something which causes the outcome - to be an NAI by 3rd party - the new act needs to be sufficiently different than the actual cause of the outcome

R v Jordan - it must be palpably wrong

23
Q

Cato

A

D need not have been the only cause of death but was more than a minimal cause

24
Q

Benge

A

D’s action need not be the sole cause of the resulting harm, but it must be more than minimal

25
Q

Novus Actus Interveniens by Victim

A

Sometimes v’s actions can count as a NAI and break the chain of causation but if V acts in a foreseeable and reasonable way in circumstances, then v’s act will not break the chain of causation

Chain of causation will be broken if v does something daft or so unexpected that the reasonable man could not be expected to foresee it

R v Roberts
R v Williams

26
Q

The “Thin Skull” rule

A

General principle is that you have to take your victim as you find them

If victim has an underlying mental health or physical condition or religious belief that will make injures worse, D is still liable for full extent of injures

R v Blaue

27
Q

Coincidence of Men’s Rea and Actus Reus

General Principle

A

AR and MR must occur at the same time, in the same place and by the same person

28
Q

Coincidence of Men’s Rea and Actus Reus - Continuing Acts

A

He did form the MR when he refused to move it and the act of placing the car on the foot (AR) remained

Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner

29
Q

Coincidence of Men’s Rea and Actus Reus - series of connected events

A

MR continued throughout as there was a series of connected events - Thabo Meli

MR continued throughout the series of connected events, so included her drowning - Church

30
Q

Mens Rea

A

Guilty mind

31
Q

Direct intent

A

D’s aim purpose or motive

Direct intention in the decision to bring about the criminal consequence - Mohan

32
Q

Oblique Intent

A

D’s aim is something different to the actual consequence

The consequence had a virtually certain result and D knew that - Woolin

Matthew’s abs Alleyne - jury may decided there is intention but they don’t have to

33
Q

Subjective Recklessness

A

Lower level of mens Rea than intent, D must know there is a risk of the consequence but takes the risk deliberately

D MUST foresee the risk and take it anyway - Cunningham

34
Q

Negligence

A

Person fails to reach the standards of the reasonable man - objective test

35
Q

2 exceptions for negligence ….

A

Some road traffic offences

Gross negligence manslaughter

36
Q

Transferred Malice

A

D can be guilty if he intended to commit a similar crime but against a different V - when d’s MR is transferred to the intended V to the actual V

MR transferred to actual V from his intended V as the offence was of the same type as he originally intended - Latimer

Even though there was no direct contact between D and V, she was injured as a direct result of his actions, and MR was transferred to V - Mitchell

If the offence on the net V is different to that which intended, there is no MR - Pembilton

Law Paper 1 (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions