Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

A Level Law OCR > elements > Flashcards

elements Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

what is the definition of crime

A

a conduct forbidden by the state and for which there is a punishment

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

why does the idea of what is criminal change over time

A

changing views in society, technology which leads to the need for new offences to cover new situations

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

what is the difference between retributive justice and corrective justice

A

retributive= a system of criminal justice based on the punishment of offenders rather than on rehabilitation.
corrective justice= the idea that liability rectifies the injustice inflicted by one person on another

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

what is the cps

A

the crown prosecution service

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

give two examples where judges decided certain conduct should be criminalised

A

maritial rape R V R 1991

the offence of conspiracy to corrupt public morals shaw v DPP 1962

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

what is the difference between ar and mr

A 
ar= an act or ommission or a state of affairs that is the prohibited conduct in an offence
mr= the mental element or the fault in an offence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is the standard of proof in criminal cases

A

beyond reasonable doubt

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

who is the burden of proof on in criminal cases

A

the prosecution

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

Direct intention definition + case

A

D’s main aim and purpose (case:Mohan)

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

Oblique intention definition + case

A

D foresaw the consequence as a virtual certainty (case:woollin)

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

recklessness definition + case

A

Taking an unjustified risk(case:Cunningham)

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

What case supports the continuing act ?

A

Fagan v metropolitan police commissioner

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

What case supports a series of events?

A

Thabo meli and church

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

When can’t malice be transferred and what case supports it?

A

If the crimes are different (case:Mitchell and gnago)

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

The ratio of mohan

A

Intention is a decision that lies in the accused power no matter whether a desired the consequence of his action or not , so it was his main aim or purpose.

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

What does S8 criminal justice act 1967 say

A

1) a court or jury in determining whether a person has committed an offence intended or foresaw a result of his actions by reason only if it’s being a natural consequence of these actions
2) decide whether he did intend or foresee that result by reference to all evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Explain the case of woolin

A

F: D was angry whilst feeding his 3 month old son and threw him towards the peak the baby hit the wall and died
H:the court will infer intention if
1)objective =the consequence is a virtually certain result of the act
2)subjective = D knows that it is a virtual certain consequence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Explain the case Of Matthews and alleyne

A

F:D’s pushed their v from a bridge into a river knowing that he couldn’t swim they pushed him head towards the bank but did not stay to see if he succeeded in getting out and the V drowned
H:the c of a stressed that the D’s appreciation of death or serious bodily harm as a virtual certainty does not constitute the necessary intention for murder but it is something from which intention can be inferred

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Explain the case of Cunningham

A

F:d in the case broke a gas meter to steal the money in it and the gas seeped our into the house next door cunninghams prospective mother in law was sleeping there and became so ill her life was endangered
H:Cunningham charged under S23 of the offences against the persons act 1861 with maliciously administering a noxious thing so as to endanger life
Subjective recklessness is that D foresaw the risk and went ahead with it anyway Cunningham was found not guilty as you couldn’t show he knew of the risk of harming somebody

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Explain the case of fagan v metropolitan police commissioner

A

F:d did not notice he had drove onto a policeman’s foot when asked to move his car he left it there
H: driving into officers foot and staying there was one continuous act so as long as D had mens rea at some point during that continuing act he was guilty

21
Q

explain the case of Thabo meli

A

f: d beat up a man believing he was dead he threw him off a cliff
h: mr is formed for the first act continued over a series of acts and a consequence some days later

22
Q

explain the case of church

A

f;d and v were attempting to have sex v mocked d and a fight broke out and he knocked her unconscious believing she was dead he threw her down a river and she drowned
h:mr continued despite d belief of a change of circumstance as mr occurred at some point during this event d was guilty of manslaughter

23
Q

explain the case of Mitchell

A

f: d tried to jump the queue at post office an elderly man took issue with appellant behaviour and challenged him d hit the old man and pushed him the man fell back onto others into the queue an old lady broke her leg and died and d was convicted of manslaughter
h: mr could be transferred from the intended victim (old man) to the actual victim (old woman) because the actual and intended crime were the same

24
Q

explain the case of gnango

A

f:v was walking home from a nursing home through a car park in south London she was on the phone and shot in the head and killed shouts were exchanged between b and gnango b wasn’t found his bullet hit v but gnango was responsible for murder malice was transferred
h; b would have been guilty of murder but under transferred malice gnango because of participation was also guilty of murder

25
Q

explain the case of pharmaceutical society of great Britain v storkwain LTD

A

f: d didn’t know they were forged and supplied drugs without a genuine prescription
H: d was charged under medicines act 1968 which states no one shall supply certain drugs without a prescription (they were forged)

26
Q

explain the case of sweet v parsley

A

f: school teacher let her house out to students who were smoking cannabis in the house she wasn’t aware and was charged with an offence of being concerned with the management of premise which were being used for the purposes of smoking contrary to the s5 (b) of dangerous drugs act 1965 statute didn’t state any requirement of MR
H: she was convicted by magistrates of “being concerned in the management of premises which were used for the purpose of smoking cannabis “ contrary to S5(b) of the dangerous drugs act 1965 miss sweet was found guilty although she had no knowledge that cannabis was being smoked she appealed to the house of lords they held that she was not guilty as presumption of MR was required had not been rebutted- crime wasn’t one of strict liability required more proof of MR

27
Q

What were the 2 cases for strict liability?

A

Blake -pirate radio broadcasts interfering with emergency channels
London borough of Harrow v shah -selling a lottery ticket to an underage child was strictly liable even though the staff has been trained to check ID

28
Q

Which case set the guidelines for use of strict liability but lord scarman

A

Gammon v AG for Hong Kong

29
Q

What are the facts Of the other strict liability cases

A

Callow v tillsone- a butchers was convicted for selling unfit meat despite the fact a vet had declared the meat to be safe case like this ensure that quality control standards are kept as high as possible
R v Howells -D’s convicted for failing to obtain a firearms certified was upheld despite the fact he believed the gun was an antique and therefore did not require a certificate

30
Q

Explain the case of alphacell v Woodward

A

F: paper making company’s overflow pumped polluted water into a river because the over flow was blocked despite regular maintenance and inspection systems the company was found guilty and fined
H: if the offence were not one of strict liability is used to encourage greater vigilance in business

31
Q

Explain the case of R v G

A

F:a 15yr old boy was charged with raping a 12yr old girl under S5 sexual offences act 2003 the girl in fact consented to sec and had told him she was 15 he pleaded guilty (upon legal advice) and was convicted but appealed against his 12 month detention order arguing inter alia that it was unfair for an offence as serious as this to he one of strict liability
H:the mental element of the offence under section 5 it makes clear is that penetration must be intentional but there is no requirement that the accused must have known that the other person was under 13 the policy is the legislation is to protect children

32
Q

What case links to creating a dangerous situation

A

Miller - he was squatting and set the mattress on fire and failed to rectify the situation

33
Q

A parental duty to act case

A

Gibbons and proctor-failed to feed the child to cause GBH and were guilty of murder as they were under a duty to act

34
Q

Contractual duty case

A

Pittwood- gatekeeper failed to shut gate after he let a car through as a result a hay cart crossed while a train approached and hit the car causing the driver to die and the gatekeeper was convicted of manslaughter as it was his contractual duty to act

35
Q

Duty of carers case

A

Stone and Robinson- stones sister was ill and they failed to get help from w doctor because if her anorexia she stopped eating and does they were libel for he death as they had an assumed responsibility to her by taking her in they failed to look after her

36
Q

Duty through an official position case

A

Dytham-police officer witnessed a violent attack on victim but took no steps to intervene and instead drove off officer was guilty of wilfully and without reasonable excuse neglecting to perform his duty

37
Q

Act of parliament requiring action

A

There are many examples of this ranging from the requirement to wear a seatbelt whilst driving a car to neglect of failure to look after a child under the children and young persons act 1933

38
Q

Explain the case of Marchant and muntz

A

F:D1(farmer) gave hay bailer to D2 (employee) to drive on public road motor cyclist (v) hit the vehicle at speed and impaired himself on the spikes and died D2 convicted of dangerous driving
H: no suggestions driving was dangerous so conviction was quashed

39
Q

R v Larsonneur

A

F: D (a french woman) ordered to leave UK and went or R of Ireland she was immediately deported and returned the o the UK she was arrested “an alien to whom leave hadn’t been granted to remain”
H:convicted because despite her actions not being voluntary she met the requirements for the AR

40
Q

What case is used for factual causation (but for)

A

white

41
Q

Explain the case of white

A

D put cyanide in his mother’s tea intending to kill her but she does of a heart attack before she could drink the tea so D wasn’t liable

42
Q

Explain the case of blaue

A

V was a jehovahs who got stabbed because v couldn’t accept blood transfusion she died D was liable because he must take their victim as they find them (religious belief or physical condition) and the stab wound was still the operating and substantial cause of death

43
Q

Explain the case of Kennedy

A

D supplied heroin to his friend V voluntarily took th drug and therefore broke the chain of causation and by his own actions V was liable

44
Q

Explain the case of Roberts

A

V accepted a lift from D who tried to rape her as the car sped off V jumped from the car and suffered cuts and bruises // D was still liable because V didn’t do anything ‘daft or unexpected’ and her actions were reasonably foreseeable

45
Q

Explain the case of Jordan

A

V was stabbed a week later at hospital the wound had almost healed Dr gave him the wrong injection and he died // the original injury wasn’t the cause of death the medical treatment was palpably wrong so there was no legal causation and D was acquitted

46
Q

Explain the case of Cheshire

A

V was shot in the thigh as stomach he was given a tracheotomy at the hospital and died of rare complications D was guilt as his actions put V in position when tracheotomy went wrong so D’s liable

47
Q

Explain the case of pagett

A

D was holding his pregnant gf by force as a hostage /human shield and police shot her as the act was reasonably foreseeable D was still liable

48
Q

Explain the case of kimsey

A

Two girls were racing D hit V and V died D tried to blame V’s death on V’s driving but the court found more than a trifling link between D’s driving and V’s death,D’s driving didn’t have to be the principal or substantial Cause of death as long as you’re sure it was a cause

A Level Law OCR (29 decks)

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