Elements Of A Crime Flashcards
Actus Reus
Conduct/actions
Conduct must be voluntary
Hill v Baxter
Drive into someone
Actus Reus
Omissions
Contractual
R v Pittwood
Didn’t close the rail gates and he died
Actus Reus
Omissions
Relationship
R v Gibbons and Proctor
Starved the daughter
Actus Reus
Omissions
Causing a chain of events
R v Miller
Set light to a building and moved and went back to sleep
Actus Reus
Omissions
Voluntary assumption of duty
R v Stone and Dobinson
Fell in love and didn’t look after his nan
Actus Reus
Omissions
Position in public office
R v Dytham
Police officer watched a fight an didn’t help
State of Affairs
A certain situation exists
R v Larsonneur
Immigrant from France to uk to Ireland to uk
Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent
Was drunk on highway
Causation
Factual
Pagett v White
Human shield of his wife
But for test
Causation
Legal
Operative and substantial
De minimus Rule
R v Cheshire
Causation
Legal
Think skull rule
R v Blaue
Was stabbed and didn’t want a blood transfusion as she was a jehovs witness
D was prosectured for her murder
Causation
Chain of Causation
No intervening acts to break the chain
R v Roberts
Rape in car so she jumped out
R v Williams
Trying to steal his wallet and he jumped out
Men’s rea
Direct intention
Setting out/ aiming to cause the consequence
R v Mohan drives into policeman on purpose
Men’s rea
Indirect/oblique intention
Consequence of D’s action is a virtual certainty and D realises this
R v Woollin
Threw his baby and it died
Matthews and Alleyene
Threw the victim into a river knowing he couldn’t swim an he drowns
Men’s rea
Recklessness
D realise that his actions involve a risk but carries on regardless
R v Cunningham
Ripped off a gas meter and poisoned his neighbour
Transferred malice
When a crime is carried out in a different way to that intended, the mens rea moves across
R v Latimer
attacked some one with his belt but It hit someone else
R v Pemblinton
Threw a stone at someone but it. But a window instead and intention can’t be transferred to property
Coincidence
Actus Reus and mens rea must conincide
Fagan v MPC R v Thabo-Meli
Intended to kill v attacked him and threw him off a cliff but he died later Tom exposeure
Strict liability
Crimes which only require actus reus so there is no mens rea needed
Callow v Tillstone
Selling meat that was checked but wasn’t safe
Sweet v Parsley
Strict liability
Teacher lent farmhouse to students where they smoked cannabis
Mens rea is needed
B v DPP
Boy was 15 and girl was 13 he asked for a blowjob
Wasn’t charged as it has a huge stigma
Strict liability where public safety in concerned
Harrow LBC v Shah
News agent selling under age people lottery tickets without meaning to and was charged as it concerned underaged gambling
Smedleys v Breed
Pea manufacturing and a women found a catilpillar in her tin
Under food and drugs act for selling unfit food for human consumption
