Criminal Law

Question 1

What is the criminal burden of proof

Answer 1

Beyond reasonable doubt

Question 2

What is the actus reus of a crime and what are the 4 actus reus’s

Answer 2

The guilty act

An act - eg stealing
A state of affairs - eg possessing a weapon
Result - eg murder
A failure to act- eg an omission

Question 3

What is the mens Rea of a crime

Answer 3

The guilty mind- intention

Question 4

What is a key case for ‘ACT’ and its legal principle

Answer 4

HILL V BAXTER 1958
- D drove across junction, ignoring sign, and hit another car. He claimed he was in a confused state of mind and had no recollection of the accident.

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: guilty however the judge established that if D was in a state of automatism e.g having a stroke while driving - involuntary - he may have been found not guilty

Question 5

What is a key case for ‘state of affairs’ and its legal principle

Answer 5

WINZAR V CHIEF CONSTABLE OF KENT 1983
- police were called to remove D who was intoxicated inside a hospital. They placed him outside and then charged him with being intoxicated on the highway.

LEGAL PRINCIPLE:
Defendant was not voluntarily on highway however offence does not require explanation, just proof of intoxication was enough

Question 6

What are the 6 types of omissions

Answer 6

Contractual duty
Professional duty
Duty to advert dangerous situation of ones own making
Voluntary care
Duty from special relationship
Statutory duties

Question 7

What is an omission by contractual duty and give a key case

Answer 7

• if you don’t do what is in your contract and someone is harmed, you are guilty of causing the harm .

KEY CASE: R V PITWOOD 1902
- D was employed by railway company to operate the gate, he opened the gate to allow a cart to pass and failed to close it then went on his lunch break. During this absence, a horse and a cart crossed and were hit and killed by the passing train

Question 8

What is omission by professional duty and give a key case

Answer 8

If you do not do what is in your professional duty and someone is harmed, you are guilty of causing the harm.

KEY CASE: R V DYTHAM 1979
D was a policeman who stood by while victim was thrown out of nightclub and was subsequently kicked to death. D took no steps to intervene and told a bystander he was going off duty. D was found guilty of misconduct in a public office

Question 9

What is an omission by voluntary care and a key case for it

Answer 9

If you volunteer to take care of someone the you are liable for any failure to take good care if they are harmed

Key case : R V STONE AND DOBINSON 1917
- stone was 67- blind and partially deaf, low IQ and no sense of smell. Stone’s sister had mental issues and suffered from anorexia nervosa. Stone and dobinson offered to care for her. SS was found dead in bed in appalling conditions.

Question 10

What is an omission by duty to advert a situation of ones own making and give a case

Answer 10

If you create a dangerous situation the you are liable for any failure to stop the situation you’ve created.

KEY CASE : R V MILLER 1983
D was squatter who spent night drinking then went to his property. He lit a cigarette and fell asleep and when he woke up he ignored the fire and went to sleep in another room. D was convicted of arson

Question 11

What is omission by duty from a special relationship and give a key case

Answer 11

Parents will be guilty if their failure to car for their children causes harm

KEY CASE: R V GIBBINS AND PROCTOR 1918
Daughter died of starvation. GIBBINS was the father and proctor was the mistress. Proctor hated the child and abused her. G left daughter with P knowing this and paid her for the service of looking after her. He claimed he believed the child was being looked after. They were both convicted of murder

Question 12

What are the two type of offences

Answer 12

Result crime
Murder, gbh, wounding with intent

Conduct crimes
Theft, speeding, dangerous driving

Question 13

What is factual causation

Answer 13

Causation using the ‘but for’ test.

But for the defendants action, would the criminal consequence have occurred?

Question 14

Give two key cases for factual causation

Answer 14

R v white 1910
-defendant attempted to poison mother but she died of an unrelated heart attack.

R v Padgett 1983
-Defendant used his pregnant girlfriend as a shield while he shot at armed policeman and they fired back and killed the girlfriend

Question 15

What is legal causation?

Answer 15

Defendants actions must be a significant contribution or have been a substantial and operative cause

-The defendants actions do not need to be the only or main cause of harm- this is known as the ‘ de minimis’ rule (defendants actions were more than minimal cause of the result)
-then needs to be a direct link in the chain of causation from the defendants original act to the resulting injury of the victim

Question 16

What is novus actus interveniens

Answer 16

A new intervening act which may break the chain of causation and the defendant will not be criminally liable anymore

Question 17

Give three key cases for legal causation

Answer 17

R v huges 2013
-defendant was uninsured and didn’t have a full driving license. While driving, he crashed into the victim who was under the influence of heroin, the victim leader died of their injuries.

R v jordan 1956
-The victim was stabbed in the stomach. In hospital, he was healing well. He was then given an antibiotic which he was allergic to the doctor then stopped the use of this antibiotic. However the next day another doctor ordered a large dose of the antibiotic. The victim died from allergic reaction and the doctor was the intervening act

Question 18

What are the five things that can break the chain of causation?

Answer 18

1. A third-party intervention.
2. Actions of the victim.
3. Poor medical treatment.
4. Conditions of the victim.
5. Natural event or disaster.

Question 19

How does third party intervention break the chain of causation?

Answer 19

The question to ask is ‘ did the third-party act unreasonably or unforeseeably?’ if yes then chain is broken.

R v pagget

Question 20

What is actions of the victim in breaking the chain of causation?

Answer 20

-The victim can break the chain of causation if they do something unreasonable or unforeseeable

Key case - r v William and Davis 1992
-The victim was a hitchhiker on the way to Glastonbury. He jumped out of the car due to fear of being robbed and he was killed.

Question 21

What is poor medical treatment in breaking the chain of causation?

Answer 21

-Hospitals can break the chain of causation only if there is palpably incompetent medical treatment

Key Case- r v Cheshire
-the defendant and victim were involved in a heated argument. The defendant shot the victim twice and the injuries were severe and after extensive surgery, the victim remained in intensive care and then a tracheotomy tube. The victim later died of complications associated with the tracheotomy tube and the gunshot wound was no longer life threatening by this point

Question 22

What is the conditions of the victim in breaking the chain of causation?

Answer 22

This is referred to as the thin skull rule

If the victim has a pre-existing condition and suffers motivate injuries than the average person, then the defendant is still fully liable . This also includes beliefs of the victim for example refusing treatment due to religious beliefs

Key case- r v Hayward 1908
-Defendant chased wife down the road making threats in an argument she fell and was kicked. She died.
-post-mortem found she had an undiagnosed pre-existing gland condition that was the cause of death following the physical exertion of running away from the defendant

Question 23

What is natural event or disaster in the chain of causation

Answer 23

-an act of God can intervene and break the chain of causation
-The test is whether it is so significant and unforeseeable that it becomes the operating cause

Question 24

What are the three types of mens rea

Answer 24

Direct intention
Oblique intention
Recklessness

Question 25

What is direct intention and give a key case

Answer 25

The defendant intended the specific consequences to occur- it was the defendants aim, purpose or desire

R v Mohan 1975
-defendant was told to stop driving by a police officer, he slowed down but at last minute accelerated.

Question 26

What is oblique intention and give a key case

Answer 26

Consequence was not the intended result

R v woolin 1998
- d intended to throw his baby into the pram but missed and the baby hit the wall, fractured its skull and died

Question 27

What is the 2 part test for oblique intention

Answer 27

1. Was the consequence a virtual certainty of defendants actions
2. Did defendant know it was a virtual certainty

Question 28

What is recklessness and give an example

Answer 28

Defendant knows there’s a risk of consequence from his actions however continued with his actions nonetheless

R v Cunningham 1957
-d broke into gas meter intending to steal money, gas seeped into neighbouring houses and harmed them

Question 29

What is transfer malice and give 2 cases with their legal principles

Answer 29

The defendants men’s rea is transferred from the intended victim to another victim

R v Mitchell 1983- D pushed in queue at post office and when confronted by an elderly man, pushed him. The elderly man then collided into the elderly woman behind him and she died
-d is guilty of involuntary man slaughter as his battery on the man transferred to the woman which caused her death

R v Latimer 1886- d aimed to hit someone with his belt however missed and hit a bystander
-the mr transferred from the intended victim to the unintended victim and d was liable for the bystanders injuries