Criminal (law) Flashcards
What are some strict liability offences?
Road traffic offences:
- speeding
- driving while disqualified
- drink driving
Health and safety offences:
- failure to ensure employee safety
- employing underage workers
Food safety offences:
- selling food unfit for human consumption
- selling alcohol to a minor
What is the course of conduct theory?
If there is a series of actions that lead to the actus reus, then provided the mens rea occurred at some point during that course of conduct, that will be sufficient
What is the continuous act theory?
If the actus reus is something that can be done over a period of time, it will be sufficient if, at some point during that time, the defendant had the required mens rea
What is assault?
Where a defendant intentionally or recklessly caused another person to apprhend (just need to believe/expect it to occur) immediate unlawful physical force
What does it mean that assault can be intended of reckless?
Intent = defendant intends the victim to apprehend
Recklessness = defendant foresees the risk that the victim will apprehend as a result of their acts (defendant must actually realise this)
What is a battery?
Where a defendant intentionally or recklessly applies unlawful physical force to another person
What can battery be caused by?
Act
Omission (e.g., defendant applies force accidentally without intent or recklessness but then refuses to remove the force)
What is the mens rea of reckless in relation to committing a battery?
Recklessness requires the actual recognition of a risk rather than it being obvious
Defendant needs to have actually recognised that there was a risk, and went on to take that risk needlessly
How can consent be given?
Expressly or by implication.
Must be given by someone with sufficient capacity / freedom / information to make an actual choice.
When will law not interfere with harm by consent?
If the harm is caused by actions just outside of the rules of the game
When will a person be guilty of a s.20 offence?
If they foresaw some harm as a result of their act at any point
When will a person be guilty of a s.18 offence?
When they have intended to cause grievous bodily harm
When they intended to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension of any person
What is Actual Bodily Harm?
An injury that interferes with the health and comfort of a victim
More than merely trifling
To carry out ABH, what must be proven?
That the defendant actually completed the act of hurting the person with the intention / recklessness as to causing unlawful physical force.
No need to prove that defendant intended to cause (or was reckless as to causing) any harm - enough to show that defendant intended to inflict unlawful physical force
What are some example of ABH?
Temporary loss of consciousness
Psychiatric injury
What is a wound?
An injury that breaks through both layers of the skin
What is grievous bodily harm + examples?
Really serious harm
- broken bones
- severe burns
- severe bleeding
- lengthy incapacitation
- psychiatric harm
When does a person commit a murder?
If they:
- cause the death of another human (not including foetus)
- unlawfully
- with an intention to kill or cause GBH
What must be shown for the mens rea element of murder?
Jury must be sure that death / serious harm was a virtually certain consequence of the defendant’s act and the defendant knew it was
If defendant is being prosecuted for murder but denies having the full mens rea, what can the jury conclude?
If the jury conclude that the defendant foresaw death / serious injury as a virtually certain consequence, they may conclude that defendant is guilty of murder
What is voluntary manslaughter?
Where murder has happened but there are specific partial defences (diminished responsibility / loss of control) that lead to the offence being treated as manslaughter instead
What is involuntary manslaughter?
An unlawful killing, but where the full mens rea of manslaughter is not established (unlawful act manslaughter / gross negligence manslaughter)
What is unlawful act manslaughter?
Where defendant, with the relevant mens rea, commits a dangerous criminal act that carries an objective / obvious risk to the victim and they die as a result
What are the requirements for unlawful act manslaughter?
- Defendant intends the act (cannot be committed by omission)
- Act is unlawful
- Act is dangerous (no requirement for the defendant to have foreseen death / no need for harm or death to have reasonably foreseeable)
- Act causes victim’s death
What must the jury conclude to convict a person of unlawful act manslaughter?
That a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have thought that their act created a risk of physical harm
What is gross negligence manslaughter?
Where defendant breaches a duty in such an extremely negligent way that they are deemed criminally culpable
There must be a serious and obvious risk of death (regardless of if defendant realises)
What are the requirements of an offence of gross negligence manslaughter to be committed?
- Duty of care to the victim
- Duty is breached and causes death
- There is a serious and obvious risk of death
- Breach is so bad that it gives rise to criminal liability
What does it mean that there must be a serious and obvious risk of death for gross negligence manslaughter?
At the time of breach, a reasonably prudent person in the same position as the defendant must have foreseen an obvious and serious risk of death
What are the requirements for diminished responsibility?
- Defendant was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning
- Which arose from a recognised medical condition
- Which substantially impacted their ability to:
- understand their conduct
- form rational judgement
- exercise self control - This provides an explanation for the killing
What are the requirements for loss of control?
- Defendant’s role in killing resulted from a loss of self control
- The loss of self control was caused by a qualifying trigger
- A hypothetical person of the defendant’s age / sex might have reacted the same way
What is the fear trigger for loss of control?
Loss of control resulting from the defendant’s fear of violence against themselves
What is the anger trigger?
Where something is said to the defendant that:
- constitutes circumstances of an extremely grave character (objective test)
- makes them upset and angry
- which causes the defendant to justifiably feel that they have been seriously wronged
For loss of control, how much must the defendant prove?
Defence must simply call sufficient evidence to raise the defence, then prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that defendant did not lose control
What is automatism?
Where defendant loses control of their body due to an external cause
Complete defence
When is automatism not available?
Where defendant is at fault for allowing themselves to get into that condition
What is theft?
dishonest appropriation of property of another with intent to permanently deprive them of it
What constitutes property for the purposes of theft?
- money
- intangible property
- real property
- personal property
What does not constitute property for the purposes of theft?
- electricity
- confidential information
- wildflowers
- fruit
- wild animals
Can land and things attached to them be stolen?
No, except:
- detached by trustee / trespasser / visitor
- tenant taking fixtures or structures from a rental property
- wild plants being picked for commercial purposes
When is intent determined for theft?
Intent is determined at the time of appropriation, such that if there is coincidence of the actus reus and mens rea at this time, the offence is committed, even if the defendant changes their mind later and puts the item back
What is the two-part test for dishonesty?
- Ascertain what facts the defendant knew (subjective)
- Judge whether the behaviour based on this knowledge was objectively dishonest
What are the defences for dishonesty?
Person will not be dishonest where:
- they believed that they have a right in law to the property
or
- they believed that they would have had the owner’s consent or the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps
When is a robbery committed?
When
- defendant commits theft
- and immediately before or at the same time
- they use force to put a victim / another person in fear of force
- in order to steal
What is force for robbery satisfied by?
- the actual infliction of force
- the causing of apprehension of force (threatening force)
- the intention to cause the apprehension of force (e.g., using a fake gun, and victim knows it is fake, but defendant intended victim to apprehend)
What is s9(1)(a) burglary?
Intentional based
Only requires intent
What is s9(1)(b) burglary?
Action based (where an additional action was committed after trespassing)
To be guilty of s9(1)(a) burglary, what mens rea must the defendant have had?
At the time of entry, defendant must have had:
- Intention to steal
- Intention to inflict GBH
- Intention to cause unlawful criminal damage
AND
- Knowledge that they are trespassing
To be guilty of s9(1)(b) burglary, what actus reus must the defendant have committed?
after entry, defendant needs to:
- Steal or attempt to steal something from the building
OR
- Inflict or attempt to inflict GBH on any person in the building
(Criminal damage is therefore irrelevant)
What does it mean that a defendant must enter the building?
Must enter the building as a trespasser
Defendant must know or be reckless as to the fact that they are a trespasser
What does it mean for burglary to be committed on a building?
Building must be a structure with some degree of permanence
When is burglary updated to aggravated burglary?
If the defendant has a weapon (made or adapted to cause injury) / firearm / explosive at the relevant time
Relevant time:
S9(1)(a) = time of entry
S9(1)(b) = time of committing the other offence
What is fraud by false representation?
Where defendant / their agent dishonestly (objectively judged) makes a false/misleading impression, knowing it is false or misleading
What is fraud by failing to disclose?
Where defendant fails to disclose information, and is dishonest in doing so
What is fraud by abuse of position?
Being dishonest as to abusing a position in which a defendant is expected to safeguard the financial interest of another
For all three fraud offences, what must the defendant have intended?
To cause a gain to himself / cause a loss to another and be dishonest in doing so.
Committed even if no loss has occurred
What is basic criminal damage?
Where defendant, without lawful excuse, destroys or damages property belonging to another, intending to do so or being reckless as to whether the property is destroyed or damaged
What is needed to prove recklessness as to damaging property belonging to another?
Requires that the defendant actually foresaw a risk of damage to property and that risk was taken unnecessarily
When is property damaged?
When it’s usefulness or value is impaired
When it will invoke effort and expense to repair
What does it mean that property must belong to another?
Person must have a proprietary interest in the property, and the defendant must know or believe that the property belongs to another
What are the defences to basic criminal damage?
- Defendant believes (subjective) that the owner consented (belief must be honestly held)
- Destruction was for the purpose of protecting the property, and the property needed immediate protection (subjective), and the steps taken were reasonable in the circumstances (objective)
What is aggravated criminal damage?
Defendant, without lawful excuse, destroys or damages property (can belong to defendant), intending to do so, or being reckless as to whether property is destroyed or damaged ALONGSIDE the intention or recklessness to endanger life by destruction/ damage
What does is mean by endangering life for aggravated criminal damage?
Life does not actually need to be endangered, as long as defendant realised that they could be endangered by his act, and went on needlessly to take that risk
Must be the actual damage that endangers life, not the actions leading to it
What is arson?
Criminal damage by fire
But damage by smoke ≠ arson, needs to have been actual fire
What is abetting?
Instigating
Encouraging
Promoting
Putting under pressure
What is aiding?
Helping
Assisting
What is counselling?
Giving advice about how to commit the offence
To be guilty of aiding / abetting / counselling, what must be shown?
Does not need to be proven that the secondary parties fully caused the result, but there must be some proof that the act had some connection with the resulting offence
What is procuring?
Putting somebody under pressure
Tricking somebody
What must be proven to be guilty of procuring?
A causative link between the secondary’s act and the principal’s offence
For accessory liability, what mens and actus rea must the accessory have had?
Intention to help
+
Intention as to the consequence
+
Knowledge that it is an offence
Recklessness ≠ accessory liability
What is an attempting offence?
Where a person does not commit the crime, but does something more than merely preparatory with the specific intent to commit the underlying offence
Offence must have been an indictable one
Who decides whether an act is more than merely preparatory?
This is question of fact for the jury
What is the mens rea for an attempting offence?
Intention to complete the full offence
What is factual impossibility?
If the defendant attempts an offence which is physically impossible to complete
Liability can still arise
What is the two stage approach for a defence of duress?
- Did the defendant have good cause to fear that if they did not so act, then the threatened would kill / cause serious injury to them / somebody close to them?
If yes
- Would a sober person of reasonable firmness sharing defendant’s characteristics have done the same?
If a person has already formed the mens rea of an offence, then becomes intoxicated to carry out the offence, will they be guilty?
Yes, intoxication is irrelevant for this purpose
What is involuntary intoxication?
If the state that the defendant has gotten into has rendered them unable to form the mens rea of the offence, then they are not guilty
If taking prescriptive medicine, court will look at whether they have followed prescriptive advice
When is involuntary intoxication not available?
Where defendant has underestimated the strength of their own drink
When is a person voluntarily intoxicated?
Where they chose to take intoxicants
Where they take an intoxicant and it has a greater effect then they realised
What will the court consider for voluntary intoxication?
If the drug was dangerous
If the crime was of specific or basic intent
To plead self defence, what must the defendant have been doing?
- protecting themself
- protecting another
- protecting property
- been trying to prevent a crime
- effect lawful arrest
What must the defendant have believed for self defence?
Defendant must believe that force was immediately required (subjectively assessed), and it must have objectively proportionate based on the facts that the defendant subjectively believes them to be
What must the defendant establish for self defence?
That they genuinely believed that there was a necessity to use force (subjective), and that force was reasonable in the circumstances (objective)
In householder cases, what level force can a defendant use to plead self defence?
Can use any degree of force as one as it is not grossly or unreasonably disproportionate
What criteria must be established for a defendant to rely on householder self defence?
Defendant must:
- Not be a trespasser
- Believe that the victim is a trespasser
court will consider decisions were made in the heat of the moment
What must be shown to rely on the defence of necessity?
- Act was required to avoid an inevitable evil
- Defendant only did what was reasonably necessary
- What the defendant inflicted was not disproportionate to what was avoided
What must be shown for an effective withdrawal?
The defendant withdraw from the participation before the offence was completed
