Elements of a Crime - Actus Reus Flashcards
Elements if criminal liability
- Prosecution must prove ECHR Article 6 - innocent until proven guilty
- Mens rea - aforethought malice
Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea
The act itself doesn’t constitute guilt unless done with a guilty (or blameworthy) state of mind’ per Lord Hailsman in Haughton v Smith [1975] AC 476, at p.491
Criminal culpability is derived from two factors…
Actus Reus; The guilty act
Men’s Rea; The guilty mind
Elements of murder
The unlawful killing of a person in the King’s peace with an intention to cause death or grievous bodily harm to the victim (Lord Coke)
Elements of criminal damage
A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence (S.1 Criminal Damage Act 1971)
Principles of Actus Reus
- D must have acted voluntarily
Offences can be committed via;
a. Actions
b. Omissions
c. A situation
d. Possession
Battery definition
D intentionally or recklessly touches or applies force to the victim
Theft definition
D dishonestly appropriated property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive
Criminal damage
Defendant intentionally or recklessly destroys or damages property belonging to another
Voluntary Act
- Theoretical basis of autonomy
- Involuntary act - force, automatism, necessity
- Normally requires a positive act
Involuntary Conduct
- Link between mind and behaviour was absent or distorted
Two types of involuntary preformance
- Uncontrollable behaviour; fits/reflex actions
- Behaviour proceeding from a lack of consciousness
Both apply equally to offences committed by omissions
Involuntary performance and automatism criteria
- D must have no control whatsoever on his actions
- D must have evidence of lack of control (Cook v Atchison 1968)
- D will be judged either insane (discharged) or in a state or automatism (acquitted)
Automatism limitations
- External/internal distinctions (insane v non insane automatism)
- Automatism through intoxication (Coley 2013/Lipman 1970)
- Prior Fault (Bailey 1983)/subjective recklessness
What loss of comtrol?/No defence of automatism when…
- There must be a complete loss of voluntary control
- D cannot plead automatism if responsible for causing own condition
Omissions definition
Criminal liability for failing to act
Duties of Omissions arise via…
- Statute eg. Road Traffic Act 1990
- Assuming public office: Dytham [1979]
- An acquired duty one undertakes eg. contract or voluntarily undertaking to care for a helpless person
Ways of acquiring and undertaking a duty…
- Under a contract: Pittwood (1902)
- Via a special relationship between D and V: Bonnyman (1942)/Gibbons v Proctor (1918)
- Voluntarily undertaking to care for a helpless person
Ways of acquiring and undertaking a duty… (cont)
- Where D creates a dangerous situation; Miller [1983]
- Via new and emerging categories like joint perpatration; Wacker [2003]
Controversial area
At what point should a moral duty give rise to a legal duty?
Causation definition
The relationship between conduct and consequences
Can be direct or indirect
Causation Tests
Factual: ‘but for’ D’s conduct would the consequence have occurred?
Legal: is the outcome one D should be considered responsible for?
Legal Causation criteria
- Can the accused act’s fairly be said to have made a significant contribution to the victims death?
- Link between D’s act and the result must not be ‘slight or trifling’
- To be significant must be relevant or operation cause - still in effect at the time of death
Novus Actus Interveniens - who is responsible?
- If intervening act is free, deliberate and informed. it will break casual chain
Third party intervening act
A free, voluntary and informed act of a third party which renders the original act no longer a significant cause of the result
Act of third party breaking the casual chain
- Must be free, voluntary and informed
- Where a person is not acting voluntarily, their action will not be a NAI
- Where a person is acting in a way which is justified his or her action if not free, voluntary or informed
- If a person does not know the circumstances of their action it may not break the chain of causation
Natural events breaking causal chain
- Natural event will not normally break chain of causation
- Where there is a freak of nature, it may break the chain of causation
