Criminal Law Flashcards
1
Q
Define murder
A
The unlawful killing of another human being with or without a weapon using malice aforethought under the king’s peace
2
Q
What is the actus Reus of murder
A
Causing a death of a human being
3
Q
What is the mens rea of murder
A
Malice aforethought, intention to kill
4
Q
How do you define a human being (murder)
A
Anyone who is born and breathing
5
Q
Define the kings peace (murder)
A
Not at war
6
Q
Define malice aforethought
A
The intention to kill or harm
7
Q
What law does murder come under
A
Common law
8
Q
What conviction do you get if you murder someone
A
Mandatory life sentence
No lesser sentence can be passed no matter circumstances
9
Q
What are the 3 defences for murder in the Homicide Act 1957
A
Diminished Responsibility
Provocation
Suicide Pact
10
Q
What act do the defences of murder come under
A
Homicide Act 1957
11
Q
What are the three levels of the men’s rea
A
Direct intention
Indirect intention
Recklessness
12
Q
Define direct intention (murder)
A
Meaning / wanting something to happen + making it happen (Mohan)
13
Q
What is a case for direct intention (murder)
A
Mohan
14
Q
Define indirect intention
A
D foresees outcome as a virtual certainty (woolin)
15
Q
What is a case for indirect intention
A
Woolin
16
Q
Define Recklessness (murder)
A
D see’s the outcome as a possibility (Cunningham)
17
Q
What case goes alongside recklessness (murder)
A
Cunningham
18
Q
Define unlawful killing (murder)
A
Committed by an act or omission
A result crime
(R v Clegg)
19
Q
What is a case for ‘the unlawful killing’ actus reus of murder
A
R v Clegg
20
Q
Define king’s peace (murder)
A
Excludes the killing of alien enemies in the time of war (WW2)
21
Q
Define ‘human being’ murder definition
A
A foetus is not a human being as a human being is a living being that must be born
(R v Inglis)
22
Q
What is a case relating to the definition of human being (murder)
A
R v Inglis
23
Q
What does malice aforethought mean
A
Intention to kill or cause GBH
(R v Vickers)
24
Q
What is a case relating to the definition of malice aforethought
A
R v vickers
25
What does GBH mean
Serious or very serious
(R v Saunders)
26
What is a case relating to the definition of GBH
R v Saunders
27
Define assault
Common assault is a summary offence with a punishment of maximum 6 months imprisonment
28
What act does assault come in
Criminal justice act 1988
29
How did the House of Lords define assault
Assault is committed where the D intentionally or recklessly caused the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence
30
In what case did the House of Lords define assault
Fagan v MPC
31
What 4 factors make up the actus reus of assault
Victim must apprehend
Immediate
Unlawful
Personal violence
32
What does it mean for the victim to apprehend (Lamb)
V needs not to be put in fear but must be aware they are about to be subjected to violence R v Lamb
33
What does it mean for the victim to apprehend in assault (Logdon)
Victim apprehends immediate unlawful personal violence will be committed even if there is no actual threat of violence Logdon v DPP
34
Can silence be assault?
Yes as seen in R v Ireland
35
What does men’s rea mean
Guilty mind
36
What is subjective recklessness
The D must realise there is an unjustifiable possible risk of the prohibited outcome occurring and D runs the risk
37
What is a case for men’s rea subjective reckleness
R v Cunningham - not guilty
38
What must the defendant have to have a mend rea
Subjective recklessness
Intention
39
What are the two types of intention
Direct
Oblique
40
What is direct intention
D has the aim, desire or purpose to bring about the prohibited offence
R V Monan
41
What is oblique intention
The prohibited outcome was a virtually certain concept and the D realised this
R v Woolen
42
Explain gross negligence and manslaughter
Negligence can form the men’s Rea of a crime where the D’s negligence is so gross and results in death.
D may be guilty of gross negligence manslaughter
R v Adomako
43
What is transferred malice
When the D has the men’s rea to comitt a crime against one victim but misses and commits a crime against another.
The men’s rea is transferred
R v Latimer
44
What are weaknesses about intent
Whether oblique intent is a type of intention or whether it just describes a state of mind from which the jury can find intention if it wishes.
Academics argue recklessness should be judged objectively as D’s should be liable for even the unforeseen results of their conduct.
Proposal for reform Law comity defined recklessness different - person acts recklessly if he is aware of the risk of the prohibited outcome and it is unreasonable to take the risk
Intention defined as - if she or he acts to bring it about or D thought result was virtually certain consequence of actions
45
What is strict liability
The idea a person can be liable without fault on their part
No require for men’s rea e.g speeding
Strict liability often regulatory in nature, often not seen as ‘truly criminal’ often concern breaches of regulations
Alphacell v Woodward
46
Where do liability offences come from
Statute law - Health and safety act 1974
Common law - blasphemy R V Lemon
47
What is an example of statute law and strict liability crimes
Health and safety at work act 1974
48
What is an example of common law being a strict liability offence
Blasphemy
49
What is a state of affair crime (strict liability)
The D is guilty of an offence if he is responsible for a situation.
Being in charge of a motor vehicle under intoxication
s4 (2) road traffic act 1988
50
What is absolute liability (strict liability)
Where the D had not acted voluntary but still guilty
R V Larsonneur
51
Why would strict liability be used
To deal with matters of social concern (R v Blake)
Promote a high degree of vigilance (Alphacell v Woodward)
Protecting the public from harm
(Harrow v Shah & Shah)
Promoting the main fence of high standards of care (Smedleys v Breed)
Easier to convict - avoid clogging up courts for routine matter
Dealing with regulatory
52
Define assault
Assault is an act which causes the victim to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful force.
The defendant intends to cause fear of immediate unlawful personal violence
53
What is the actual reus of assault
An act which causes the victim to apprehend the infliction of immediate unlawful force
54
Explain the actual reus of assault in detail
Act - not an omission, including words spoken or written R v Constanza
In R v Ireland, it’s held silence can be assault
Apprehend immediate unlawful force - the acts of words must cause the victim to apprehend immediate force is going to be used against them. There is no assault if the situation is obvious that the defendant can not actually use force
e.g pointing an unloaded gun at someone who knows the gun is unloaded can not be assault
R v Lamb
Unlawful - if it is lawful there is no assault
Immediate - sudden
Smith v Chief superintendent of Woking police station
55
Which case defines an act of assault
R v Constanza
Silence - R v Ireland
56
In which case was silence held as an assault
R v Ireland
57
What is a case for apprehend immediate unlawful force in assault
R v Lamb
Pointing an unloaded gun at someone who knows the gun is unloaded is not an assault
58
What is a case for ‘immediate’ in assault
Smith v Chief superintendent of Woking Police Station
59
What is the men’s Rea of assault
Intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful personal violence
or
Subjective recklessness to whether such fear is caused
MPC v Fagan
60
What is the case for men’s Rea of assault
MPC v Fagan
61
What offence is assault
Summary offence
62
What statue is assault under
Criminal justice act 1988
63
What is the maximum sentence for assault
Up to 6 months imprisonment
64
What is battery
Battery or assault by beating is the second part of common assault.
The application of unlawful force to another person, intending either to apply unlawful physical force to another or being reckless as to whether unlawful force is applied.
65
What is the maximum sentence for battery
Up to 6 months imprisonment
66
What is the actus reus of battery
The application of unlawful force to another person. Force can include the slightest touching (Collin v Wilcock)
The offence must be unlawful, if could be an offence for a police officer to detain a person without violence if they do not intend to arrest the person
Program v DPP
Touching someone else clothes can be battery
R v Thomas
Court of appeal stated that touching someone’s clothes amounts the same as touching someone
Continuing act - battery must be committed
Indirect act - battery can be committed if defendant causes force to be applied but does not personally touch victim DPP v K
Omissions - omitting to perform an act is rarely battery however can be seen in case DPP v Santa-Bermudez
67
What are the cases for actus reus for battery
Force - Collins v Wilcock
Unlawful - Pegram v DPP
Touching clothes - R v Thomas
Indirect - K v DPP
Omissions - DPP v Santa-Beemudez
68
Describe battery without an assault
It is possible to have battery with no assault when the victim is unaware unlawful force is about to be used on them such as the attacker coming up unseen or victim is asleep
69
What is theft
Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it
70
What is the actus reus of theft
Appropriating property belonging to another
71
What is appropriation
The act of taking.
Physically taking an item, destroying property, switching price labels, tooling goods from a shop shelf.
Owner of property has rights to destroy, sell, lend, hire their property. Thief must do something which assumes at least one of the owners rights. R v Vinall
If d destroys victims property, this is still theft R v Morris
Consent to appropriation (Lawrence) implied consent is not consent.
Appropriation can take place at any time, appropriation can change to be ‘keeping’ or ‘dealing
72
Explain property in theft
Includes money, personal things, real, intangible
Money - coins and bank notes
Real - land and property, taken by someone not in possession of land
Personal property - all moveable items such as books, jewellery, cars as well as items like pens R v Kelly and Lindsay
Things in action - enforced by taking legal action, a cheque is a thing in action
Intangible - other rights which have no physical presence such as data in computer games
Knowledge can not be stolen Oxford v Miss
73
What is factual causation and what test is used + a case
If the outcome would have happened regardless of D’s conduct D is not the cause
But for test
R v White
74
What is a case for factual causation
R v White
75
What is legal causation + case
D’s conduct need not be the main event of outcome
R v Benge
Legal causation is established if D’s conduct only needed to be more than a minimal cause of the outcome
76
Can medical negligence break the chain of causation + case
No unless extraordinary and unusual
R v Jordan
77
What is the thin skull rule
D must take V as they find them
78
Can a victims actions break the chain of causation
Not if they was within range of reasonable response, forseeable by the ordinary person
79
What are offences against the person
Common assault
Battery
80
Which law does assault come under
S39 criminal justice act 1988
81
What is the actus reus common assault
V must apprehend immediately unlawful violence will be used
Apprehend - general awareness of violence, need not be put in fear but must be aware R V Lamb
Silence can amount for assault R v Ireland
Immediate - V apprehend assault will happen in reasonable time, threats of future violence will not amount R v Smith
Unlawful violence - does not need physical violence just fear of violence
82
Cases for actus reus common assault
R v Lamb
R v Ireland
R v Smith
83
Men’s Rea of common assault
Intention or recklessness to cause apprehension of immediate unlawful violence R v Cunningham
84
What is the punishment of assault and battery
6 months imprisonment
85
Actus reus of battery
Application of unlawful force to a victim who does not consent
Application of unlawful force - lawful excuse will not amount, force is misleading as any touch will Suffice if it goes beyond accepted norms Collins v Wilcock
Does not consent - no consent is battery
86
Men’s rea of assault
R v Mohan - intention to apply unlawful force
R v Cunningham - recklessness D’s conduct will apply unlawful force
87
What did law commission suggest about reform for battery and assault
Terms are confusing should be called ‘threatened assault’ and “physical assault’
88
What act is actual bodily harm under
Offences against the person act 1861
89
What is the actus reus of actual bodily harm
Assault or battery occasioning ABH
Assault or battery - all elements of assault and battery law must be present DPP v Taylor
Occasioning - causation must be factual and legal R v White
ABH - any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim that’s more than trivial but less than serious R v Donovan
90
Cases for actus Reus of ABH
DPP v Taylor
R v White
R v Donovan
91
Men’s Rea of ABH
Intention or recklessness to cause assault or battery
Need no intention or recklessness for injury’s R v Roberts
92
Maximum sentence of ABH
5 years inprisonment
93
5 evaluation points ABH
Actus reus and men’s rea do not match (correspondence principle)
Sentence is same as S20 GBH
Law reform: S47 be replaced with intentionally recklessly cause injury
Should be new offence aggravated assault with max sentence 12 months
94
What is wounding + case
A break to the continuity of the whole of the skin (both layers)
Marority v Brooks
95
What does GBH mean
Serious or very serious
96
Actus Reus of S20 GBH
Unlawfully wound or inflict GBH on another person
Unlawfully - covers those acting in self defence or prevention of crime as well as sports R v Hopley
Wound - break continuity of skin Moriarty v Brookes
GBH - serious or very serious DPP v Smith
Including psychiatric injury R v Burstow
Inflict - direct or indirect application of force R v Wilson
97
Men’s Rea for S20 GBH
D has intention or is reckless to the causing of some harm
R V Savage
98
Cases for S20 actus reus GBH
R v Hopley
Morarity v Brooks
R v Burstow
R v Savage
99
Actus Reus for S18 GBH
Unlawfully wound or inflict GBH on another person
Unlawfully - covers those acting in self defence or prevention of crime as well as sports R v Hopley
Wound - break continuity of skin Moriarty v Brookes
GBH - serious or very serious DPP v Smith
Including psychiatric injury R v Burstow
Inflict - direct or indirect application of force R v Wilson
100
Men’s Rea S18 GBH
Intention to cause really serious harm R v Woolin
101
4 criticisms s20 GBH
actus reus and men’s Rea do not match so d may be held liable for outcome they didn’t foresee (correspondence principe)
Penalty for s20 can only be ascertained by reference to a chain of interlocking statues
Max sentebce is same for less serious ABH doesn’t make sense
Not all wounds constitute a level of harm commensurate with s20 or 18 offence
102
What where law commission reforfms for GBH
S20 replaced with offence of recklessly causing serious injury - sentence of 7 years
S18 replaced with intentionally causing serious injury - max life in prison
103
Case for kings peace murder
R v Blackman
104
what is express malice
D desires to kill or virtually certain their conduct will result in V’s death
R v woolin
105
What is implied malice
D desires to cause really serious harm or is virtually certain to result in really serious harm and d realises this
R v Mohan
106
Criticisms murder
Implied malice unfair - someone who did not foresee death out in same category as serial killer
Each element of murder has developed through individual cases meaning it lacks coherence
107
Proposals for murder reform
First degree murder and second degree
First - killing intentionally or killing where an intention to do serious injury coupled with awareness of serious risk of causing death
Second - killing where offender intended to do serious injury or killing where offender intended to cause some injury and was aware of serious risk of causing death
108
What act does diminished responsibility come under
Coroners and justice act 2009
109
If successfully use diminished responsibility what does crime change too
From murder to voluntary manslaughter
110
What 4 things does D have to prove for diminished responsibility
Abnormality of mental functioning that is a recognised mental condition which causes substantial impairment to explain the defendants act omission or killing
Abnormality of mental functioning - state of mind so different from ordinary. Reasonable man would term it abnormal R v Bryne- expert advice must show this
Recognised medical condition - WHO international classification of disease R v Hobson
Substantial impairment - to understand nature of own conduct
Form rational judgement
Exercise self control R v Golds
Explain D’s act or on mission
Abnormality more than minimal cause of killing. Jury set aside intoxication and focus on abnormality R v Wood
111
Cases for diminished responsibility
R v Bryne
R v Hobson
R v Golds
R v Wood
112
What is sentence of diminished responsibility
Avoids mandatory life sentence
Max sentence is still life
113
Weaknesses of diminished responsibility
Burden of proof is on the defendant contradicts idea of innocent until proven guilty and fair trial - article 6 ECHR
Law commission argued should be developmental immaturity limb to defence, to cater for those under 18 with insufficient judgement and understanding to be found guilty of murder
114
What does successful plea of loss of control lead to
Murder -> voluntary manslaughter
115
What act does loss of control come under
S54 coroners and justice act
116
What is a loss of control
Loss of the ability to act with considered judgement or normal powers of reasoning. Loss of control can be claimed after a delay
117
What are triggers of loss of control
Fear
Anger
118
Describe fear trigger of loss of control
Does not need to be reasonable just genuine
R v Clegg
119
What is anger trigger of loss of control
Things said or done or both that constitute circumstances of an extremely grave character and cause D to have justifiable sense of being seriously wrong
Said or done - need not come from V R v Davies
Extremely grave - let jury decide
Justifiable sense of wrong - use objective test what would reasonable person think
120
Restrictions of loss of control
Sexual infidelity not enough on its own R v Clinton
If D incited can not rely on fear or anger
121
What are relevant circumstances of loss of control
Epilepsy
Unemployment
Depression
Sexual abuse suffered as child (Hill)
122
Strengths of loss of control
Old law provocation reformed to provide more protection for victims eg sexual infidelity
Offers more protection to bettered women who may not have been able to satisfy requirements under old law for loss of control suffer
Objective test is illogical as person with normal degree of tolerance would not kill in first place
If partial defence didn’t exist jury may acquit D out of sympathy
123
Weakness loss of control
Badly drafted eg loss of control not defined and left to jury
Sexual infidelity not defined and hurt supposed to disregard when considering anger trigger but can account for objective test - confusing
Defence insufficiently available to D’s if courts continue to interpret narrowly
124
Potential reform for loss of control
Provoked extreme emotional disturbance
