Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

A-level Law 👩🏿‍⚖️ > Fatal Offences Against The Person 🔪 > Flashcards

Fatal Offences Against The Person 🔪 Flashcards

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

What is loss of control ?

A

The partial Defense to murder - lowers to manslaughter

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

What is loss of control under ?

A

S.54-55 coroners and justice act 2009

D to prove stage 1 and is prosecution to disapprove defence (R v Jewell 💎)

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

What is the first stage for loss of control?

A
  1. D Must have a loss of control ? D must lose control of their mind to exercise self control of action

Does not need to be immediate ( S.54(2))

R V Ibrams + Gregory

However it cannot be revenge - (R v Bailie )

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

What is stage 2 for loss of control ?

A

S.55 Loss of control must be caused my qualifying trigger -
S.55(3)- fear trigger - not self defence and its disproportionate force

loss of control because you fear serious harm or death against yourself or another identifiable person- close family member only

R v Ward - R v Lodge

S.55(4) - anger trigger - things said or done that not only constitutes circumstances of an extremely grave character but also gives def a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged

Grave character - so bad a reasonable person recognises the severity

R V Hatter - breakup in relationship is never enough

R v Bowyer - cannot rely on anger trigger if carrying out an criminal act

R v Zebedee + R v Knight

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

What are the three areas in stage 2 within the anger trigger that disproves this ?

A

R V Hatter - breakup in relationship is never enough

R v Bowyer - cannot rely on anger trigger if carrying out an criminal act

R v Zebedee + R v Knight

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

What is S.55(6) instage 2 of loss of control?

A

S.55(6) Gives us restrictions to triggers

(A+B) to incite things (a)

or things said - (b- R v Dawes)

(C) sexual infidelity - R v Clinton - have to consider if there are any other factors that add to weighing on Extrems character

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is in stage 3 of loss of control

What are the two cases used to excuse the use of this stage

A

Would Someone the same age and sex or age of normal degree of tolerance and self restraint under same circumstance acted In a similar way

R v Mohammed - cannot consider short temper

R v Asmalash - cannot consider intoxication

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

What is assult?

A

An assault is committed when the defendant intentionally or recklessly cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence

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

What is the actus reas of Assult ?

A

Caused victim to apprehend immediate or unlawful violence

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

What are the 4 stages to assault? (+cases)

A
  1. Apprehend - where do do think the violence will be carried out against you (R v Lamb 🐑) - was victim scared 😱?
  2. Immediate- immediacy is satisfied when the victim does not know what’s going to happen next , but knows it is of violent nature (Smith v CC of Woking police )

3) Unlawful- no legal justification or cause like posing as a threat of harm ?

4) personal violence - assault can occur silently ( R v Ireland 🇮🇪) by words (Constanza ) but can also negate an assault ( Turbervile V Savage ) and actions ( Logdon)

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

What is the mens rea of assult ? Case ? What section is this under?
How many months ?

A

Intention to cause victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force or to be reckless - ( R v Parmenter) - revenge ? Frustration ect?

S. 39 Criminal Justice act - 12 months

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

What in involuntary manslaughter ?

A

When you cause death with no intent

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

What are the 2 types of involuntary manslaughter?

A

Unlawful act - an act that leads to death or constructive

and gross negligence - an omission that had lead to death serious negligence that has amounted to a crime

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

What are the 4 stages in unlawful act under involuntary manslaughter?

A

1) must be some form of a criminal offence eg battery 🪫 administering a-noxious substances
Arson - R v Lamb 🐑 (no apprehension) R v Cato

2) the unlawful act must be classed as a dangerous act - R v Church would a sober and reasonable person recognise the risks of some harm

R v JM + SM - don’t have be expected specific harm

R v Goodfellow - dangerous cat can be transferred to property

R v Dawson + R V Johnson - not enough to fighten someone

R v Mitchell - transferred malice to actual victim to intended victim

  1. Must cause death - but for factual - R v White

Legal significant contributing factor - R v Coroin Augustine
Kennedy (no.2) only legal cause if you administer the drug

  1. Mens rea - if it if the unlawful act (DPP v Newbury ) - say if d had intent or
    recklessness
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What kind of sentence Is gross manslaughter ? What kind of test do we have ?

A

Discretionary life sentence - R v Bateman

3 stage test

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

What is the 3 stage test for gross negligence ?

A
  1. Must must have a duty or care - create dangerous situation and fail to rectify it
    (R v Winter + winter )

Contractual

Assumption of responsibility ( R v Stone+ Dobinson) ( R v wacker)

Close family (R v Lowē) ( R v Evans)

Statutory authority

  1. Must be a breech of duty that causes death - DPP V Andrew - falls below stander of reasonable person
  2. there must be an obvious risk of death at time of the breach - clear and unambiguous

( R v Rudely)- A serious risk of death is not to be equated with the inability to eliminate possibility

(R v Rose 🥀)- A mere possibility is not the same as an obvious risk - an obvious risk is apparent without investigation

  1. Reasonably foreseeable that at the time of the breach it gave a rise in obvious issue of death ( R v Misra Sivra Straver

R v Broughton 90% - not enough have to be entirely sure
- when fail to get medical assistance you have to show the patient would’ve survived

  1. Causations
    Factual - but for - R v White
    Legal causation - failure to act was highly probable to result in Death (R v Broughton)
  2. Negligence has to be serious enough that it gives rise to criminal liability

R v Adomako - Wether having regard of risk of death negligence was so bad that also could stances amounts to rise in criminal responsibility
( R v Edwards)

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

What is the Actus reas of Battery ?

A

Unlawful application of physical force

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

What are the 3 stages of battery ?

A
  1. Application (of force)-
    held by means of touch ever so slight directly - ( R v Day)
    Indirectly - (DPP v K)
    or by ommison ( R v Santana Bermundez )
  2. Unlawful- means that there is no legal justification( Collin v Wilcock )

3.- Force - ( R v Day ) (Falkner v Tabok) Any touch will suffice

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

What is the Mens rea of Battery ?

A

Intention to apply unlawful force or be reckless - you know the risks but you do commit the crime anyways (R v Venna )

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

What is consent?

A

Defence to all crimes except murder
Do not have defence on-Euthanasia - Nicklinson V UK 🇬🇧
can have DNR

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What kind of defence is consent ?

A

Complete defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is the first stage of consent?

A

Must have consent that it valid and genuine

1) Person giving consent must be able to comprehend the nature of the act

Eg a) children - must have legal requirements 18 ( R v Burrell+Harmer)

16- legal to give consent to sex- Gillick case - person must have the age and maturity to understand the risk involved - able to give consent

b) mental capacity act 2005 - Have a disability

c) mental health act - must not have a mental illness that may influence ability to give consent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What is the second part of Stage one for consent?

A
  1. Consent must not be vitiated by fraud
    Through
    the identity of a person (R V Dica)
    or nature + quality of the act- why are they committing act (R v Tabassum)

R v Richardson - not fraud

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the second stage of consent?

A

General rule - cannot in circumstances consent to harm
Collin V Willcock- most bodily contacts are impliedly consented by all
R v Brown
R v Leech - cannot convent to crucifixion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What is the third stage to consent?

A

Exceptions to a criminal act due to lack of Consent

Medical dentistry surgery

Cosmetic enhancement- R v Wilson

Activities in a relationship 😏🌶

Horseplay- rough and rowdy play with friends - R v Aithen
R v Jones - bumpies

Sports ⚽️-
R v Billinghirst - perison cannot give consent if “off the ball” - outside rules of game

R v Barnes - Conduct must be serious enough to give a rise in criminal liability

3 factors have to be satisfied to make it a criminal liability

1) act was done in heat of the moment
2) consider level of sport 🥇
3) does sport have its own disciplinary proceedings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What is the actus reas of ABH?

A

When a defendant commits an assault that occasions to actual bodily harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What section is ABH under ?

A

S.47

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What are the 3 stages of ABH?

A
  1. Find out if it’s assault or battery 🪫 and why
  2. Which causes ? Legal but for or factual occasions (R v Ireland 🇮🇪)
  3. Actual bodily harm - DPP v Chan-Fook “any harm that is not so trivial (likely to happen or not ) as to be wholly insignificant that includes harm to all parts of the body including the mind”

Physical harm - DPP v Smith
Loss of consciousness- DPP v T

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What is the MR - case ?

A

Defendant has the intent to apply unlawful force or cause V to fear force or recklessness
D Does not need to Intend ABH - R v Savage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

GBH of wounding is under what section ?

A

S. 20 less serious than
GBH with intent (S.18)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What is the max penalty of GBH s.20?

A

5 years - TEW

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What does section 20 GBH provide us with? (Actus Reas )

A

Who ever should unlawfully wound or inflict a GBH with or without a weapon is guilty of a misdemeanour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What are the 4 stages of GBH section 20?

A
  1. Unlawfully
    - is lawful if they are doing it for self defence or preventing a crime
    Limited circumstances if in a game or surgery
  2. Wound - break in the continuity of the skin (JJC v Eisenhower) - internal rupture Is not a wound
  3. Inflict - leads to causation ( R v Ireland 🇮🇪)
    But for - ( R v White )
    operating and substantial causes - (
    R v Smith) - conduct results to the the crime/harm

Thin skull - (Smith v leech brain 🧠)

intervening acts (Reeves v commissioner police 👮‍♀️ )

GBH - DDP v Smith - serious harm however

R v Sanders - no more or less than serious harm ( may be subjective )

Broken bones - R v Lewis

Infections - (R v Dica )

Multiple ABHs ( R v Brown + Stratton )

R v Burstow - can amount to physiatric
Injury - prove causation

R v Bollom - vunrable

No physical force needed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What is the Mens rea of GBH s.20

A

Defendant has intention to be be reckless and cause some harm
R v Mowatt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What is the actus reas of of GBH under s. 18 wounding with intent ?

A

Defendant unlawfully wounds victim and inflicts GBH with weapon or instrument with intent and resist and prevent unlawful detainer of a person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

To what extend does the law on consent need reform ? (20)

  1. Evaluate convent being a complete defence for All crime except for murder
A

No defence on Euthanasia but can turn of life support- Airdale V Bland can do DNR

Assisted dying bill raised in Parliament - rejected at 2nd reading on 2 occasions - Nicklenson V UK 🇬🇧 unsuccessful- no breech of human right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

To what extend does the law on consent need reform ? (20)

  1. Evaluative the first stage of consent ?
A
  1. Is it valid and genuine?- person busy be able to comprehend nature of the act considering age - R v Burrell + Harmer
    Legal requirements 18

Consider Gillick competence test - test asks age maturity and understanding of consent

Positive- good children cannot give consent - protects vunrable children

Negative - Gillick test is stretching the law and parental responsibilities (unclear and subjective )

Won’t always allow consent if person lacks mental capacity- mental health act 2003 and mental capacity

Positive - protects vunrable and why we have rules on power of attorney

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Evaluate the second stage of consent

A
  1. Must not be vitated by fraud - Nature of act - R v Tabbasum
    Identity- R v Dica
    Not guilty - R v Richardson

Positives - important to protect people and set example of honesty within society ( R v Dica )

Negative - problem if person knew the rules wound not have consented - R v Richards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Evaluate the third stage of consent

A
  1. Generally speaking cannot concent to harn ( R v Collin + Willcock ) ( R v Brown)

Positives - set standards of acceptable behaviour
Allows not ambiguity

Negatives - reliance of behaviour with may be unfair
What counts as harm is unclear
Body is your own not sensible when people smoke 💨 or drink 🍹

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Evaluate the 4th stage of consent ?
(Sport )

A

Exceptions - sport allows consent for serious injury or death - R v Billinghurst ( off the ball)
R v Barnes - so serious that it amounts to a criminal act - have to see if it was in the heat of the moment, level of sport and if their are any disciplinary of the sport

Positives - encourages sport can’t prevent injury

Negative - may argue that extreme behaviour in high level sports may be always dealt with internally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Evaluate the 4th Stage of consent (horse play)

A

Horse play - R v Aitken R v Jones

Negatives - implemented consent could lead to miscarriages of justice

Poorly defined - lead to injury
Positives - should be allowed to do leisurely activities should be fun

42
Q

Evaluate the 4th stage of consent (Cosmetic enhancement and homosexual sadomasochism )

A

Homosexual sadomasochism-

R v Brown - activities Within the relationship

Negatives - Outcome needed to be changed as outcome was based on morals of Judge

R v Wilson- cosmetic enhancement

Negatives - need of clearly standers of acceptable behaviour within a relationship

Positive- Tattooing and branding are acceptable behaviour in society

43
Q

When was the Law Commission made?

A

1994

44
Q

What did the law commission argue?

A

But you should be allowed to give consent to harm but not serious harm

45
Q

What may the law commission provide within consent?

A

A list of expectations as a guide but maintain case principal (horseplay)

46
Q

What is the positive evaluation of the law commission providing a list of expectations but maintaining case principle? ( horse play)

A

Supports the body being his own but set high limits the actions I’m not immoral

47
Q

What Act does insanity come from?

A

Trials of lunatics act

48
Q

What kind of verdict is it?

A

Special verdict

49
Q

What kind of outcomes do you get if successful with the Insanity plea?

A

if you’re successful

not guilty by reason of insanity may get

hospital order
treatment
supervision orders
or discharge

50
Q

What kind of defence is insanity?

A

Complete defence for all crimes including murder however you can use dim res for murder only 

51
Q

What case provides us with a three stage test to see if a person is able to use the defence of insanity?

A

R v MNayten

the 3 D’s!

52
Q

What is the first stage of insanity(R v MNayten)

A
  1. you need a defect of reason
  • R v Clark - deprived powers of reasoning- not just forgetful
53
Q

What is the second stage of insanity?

A
  1. Caused by a disease in the mind - bratty- Recognised medical condition must be an internal cause-

Must affect the mental faculties of reason memory and understanding

Epilepsy - R V Sullivon

Diabetes- R V Hennessey suffer from hyperglycaemia failed to take insulin

Arteriosclerosis - R v Kemp - no blood to the brain

Sleep walking - R v Burgess 

54
Q

What is the third stage of insanity?

A
  1. Defendant did not know what they were doing or did I not know what they were doing was wrong

R v Windle- I suppose they gonna hang me for this wrong - is it legally wrong?

R V Bell- knows it’s wrong but does it anyways as their wrong reasoning overpowers it being legally wrong

55
Q

Where is theft robbery and burglary found under?

A

The theft act 1968

56
Q

Are the differences between theft robbery and burglary?

A

Theft - taking of property

robbery- the taking of something with a threat of force

Burglary - Tress passing then stealing something

57
Q

Definition of theft

A

A person is guilty of theft if they dishonestly appropriate property belonging to someone else with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it

58
Q

What is the actus reus of theft? ( Appropriation)

A

S.3 - 1. Assume rights the owner - R v Morris

  1. Appropriation can occur with owners consent- R v Gomez
    Theft does not have to be taken for an appropriation to exist
  2. Any Civil and criminal conflicts (R V Hinks )
59
Q

What is the first criticism of non-fatal offences?

A

Strengths of current law

60
Q

What is the actus reus of theft under property s. 4? 

A

Definition - money and all other property real and personal including things in action and other intangible property

  • what has been stolen ? Any evidence ?

R v Welsh R v Kelly

Oxford V Moss - Potential information is not property

section 4 (3) - Picking wild plants is not stealing property unless you are not using it for commercial purposes

Section 4(4) - Capturing a wild animal is not seen property as long as they are not tame 

61
Q

what is the actus reus of belong to another s.5 under theft ?

A

1. s.5(1) - In possession or in control R v Turner- person can still be found guilty of theft if their own or are in possession of property that is not under their control

  1. s.5(1) People with the proprietary interest in property - R V Hancock - See who has the highest level of proprietary and deem whether it is theft or not 
  2. s.5(2) Trust property - R v Wain - money is money belonging to another person within a trust
  3.  s.5(3)- Person holding money for a specific purpose Davidge v Bennet - Person who’s giving money for a specific way to be dealt with and it’s not dealt in that way that is theft 

s.5(4) received property by mistake R v Gilks - AG ref

62
Q

What is the first part of Mens Rea of Theft? What section?

A
  1. Dishonestly S.2
    s2(1)(a) person believes they have the right in law to appropriate property R v Holden

S.2 (1)(b) believe they have owners consent

S.2 (1) (c) - still appropriated property even though you can find owner through reasonable steps R v Small

If none of this Appleby - used Barton v Booth - would a reasonable person think it’s dishonest

63
Q

What is under the Mens Rea of Theft , intention to permanently deprive others of it? S.6

A

Defendants property to dispose of regardless of the owners right R v Velumly

Borrowing can still be theft - if taking the goodness out of it R v Bagshaw

Ransom principle - R v Coffey

Buy back principle - R v Raphael

64
Q

What’s are the three types of Actus Rea under theft?

A
  1. Appropriation s.3
  2. Property - s.4
  3. Belonging to another s.5
65
Q

What is the second Criticism to the strength of current law ?

A

1.2 - development

66
Q

What does 1.2 development mean?

A

Courts have continued to development law

67
Q

What are the 3 points supporting 1.2 developments ? (To what extent does development of current law reduce the need for statutory reform ? )

A

A) batteries have been developed to include direct and indirect batteries (haystead)
B) law on ABH has been developed to meet new circumstances
C) GBH has been developed to meet new circumstances

68
Q

What is the second part of criticisms of non-fatal offences?

A

Perceived weaknesses of current law

69
Q

What are the 2.1 General criticisms ?

(Perceived Weaknesses of current law)

A

A) It is accepted that law on non-fatal offences need reform

B) criticised for unjust and unclear

C ) law is constantly being redefined through cases

70
Q

What case do we get automatism from ?

A

R v SmallShire

71
Q

What is the definition of automatism?

A

A loss of voluntary self control caused by something unforeseen and not self induced

72
Q

what kind of defence is Automatism?

A

Complete defence to all crimes

73
Q

What is the first stage of automatism?

A
  1. In voluntary action - loss of voluntary control

(Broome v Perkins) - must be a loss of total control- still able to have some form of control? not automatism 

Bratty - “an act done without control of the mind such as a spasm or reflex”

74
Q

What is the second stage of automatism?

A
  1. Caused by an external factor- something outside of the mind ( R v Whooley ) - sneezing 🤧

R v Quick - diabetes - hypoglycaemia- when you fail to eat or take too much insulin

Hills v Baxter - Bees

R v T - PTSD from rape

75
Q

What is the third stage of automatism

A
  1. Cannot be self induced - Alcohol - R v Bailey
    Diabetes - R v C “could the unreasonable state be easily avoided” - check insulin levels - could have
76
Q

What is after discussing 2.1 general criticisms ?

A

2.2 language

77
Q

What are the 3 criticisms under 2.1 Language

A
  1. Some phrases not defined in statute so need to be explain through case interpretation
  2. No clear definition on what assault actually is - has narrow technical meaning and wider technical meaning in S.47 - help with assault and battery conflict
  3. Non-lawyers find the act completely unintelligible
78
Q

What is After 2.2 language?

A

2.3 Problems with particular offences

79
Q

What are the three problems with the particular offences 2.3 ? 

A

Still no clear statutory definition for assault or battery

The requirement that threat must be of immediate force to be in a sort means that there is a gap in law

Both section s.20 and s.18and two separate offences no logical connection

ABH - the method

GBH with the extent

80
Q

What is after 2.3 ? ( Problems with particular offences)

A

2.4 - Outdated

81
Q

What are the three reasons for 2.4 outdated? 

A

1) Law Needs updating to reflect modern society and modernising language

2) Judges need to continuously re-interpret law to deal with new situations

3) Lord Steyn - R v Ireland 🇮🇪 - Victorian legislator will not have in mind psychiatric illness

82
Q

What Is the mens rea Of s.18 GBH

A

Intention to cause GBH and wounding and resist arrest -

Intent to wound is not enough-( R v Belfron )
Intent to cause serious violence -( R v Taylor )

Look for words like revenge

frustration it’s not direct was there but virtual certainty from defendants actions objective test- R v Woolin


83
Q

What is after 2.4 outdated criticisms with non-fatal offences? 

A

2.5 Hierarchy of seriousness

84
Q

What are the three points under 2.5 hierarchy of seriousness?

(criticisms of non-fatal offences)

A

A) assault and battery is punished for six months
section 47 assault five years imprisonment

B) Only difference is that ABH is caused yet it causes only a little discomfort

C) Both section 47 and 20 had the same maximum sentence- however section 20 as seen as more serious in mens Rea and actus reus

85
Q

What is after 2.5 hierarchy of seriousness ?

A

2.6 consent

86
Q

What are the two points under 2.6 consent ?

A

A) not being recognised as a defence to any assault - people Believe that victims should be able to choose the injury they prepare to suffer under 

B) People are concerned to whether consent is a defence

87
Q

What has the law commission report number 361 made amendments to? ( 3 things )

A
  1. Wounding causing GBH or intent replaced by intentionally causing serious injury ( life sentence)
  2. Assault has been replaced by physical assault and threatened assault
  3. Assaulting a clergy ( 2 years ) and Mag (7) replaced with abolishment 
88
Q

What is the mens rea on the GBH s.18

A

Intent to cause serious harm
- (R v Taylor )

Intent to wound is not enough-
( R v Belfron)

89
Q

Where is robbery found? 

A

S.8 of theft act 1968

90
Q

What is the definition of robbery?

A

If he steal and immediately before or at times of doing so and In order to do so uses force on any person to put them in fear and subject to any force

91
Q

What is the actus reas of robbery ?

A
  1. Actus reas of theft
  2. Force or threat of force
    A) level of force that is decided by jury but does not need to be high (R v Dawson) - was force used or being a threat

B) force must be used in order to steal - appropriation is a continuing act
Was it? - R v Hale

92
Q

What is the mens rea of Robbery?

A
  1. MR of theft
  2. Intentionally or recklessly use or threat of force - did they intent or where at least reckless

Then conclude if d is guilty of robbery- stages satisfied ?

93
Q

What is the third things under consent ? 

A
  1. Proposals of reform
94
Q

What is the four proposals for reform ?

A
  1. Replace assault and battery with new offence of assault
  2. Replace S.47 with intentional reckless injury
  3. Replace ABH with reckless injury
  4. Replace S.20 with reckless injury
95
Q

What changes did Parliament make in 2018?

A

Introduced assaults on emergency workers act 2018- 12 months

96
Q

What is the definition of burglary? what are the Alteria offences ? (3)

A

Trespass with intent to steal and commits GBH criminal damages and sexual offences

97
Q

What are the two types of burglary and what sections are they under? What are the differences? 

A

S.9(1)(a)-when a person enters a building as a trespasser with the intent to steal commit GBH or criminal damage

S.9(1)(b) -Having entered the building as a trespasser the defendants steals and inflicts only GBH

98
Q

What is the actus reus of burglary under S.9(1)(a) of the theft act 1968?

A
  1. Entry - must be effective all or parts of the body Entering the building ( R v Ryan ) 
  2. Trespasser must exceed permission
    ( R v Jones + smith) (Smith Hillen Pettigrew V ICI )
  3. Did burglary occur in a building? (R v Stephan + Gouley) - A fixed structure with a considerable size designed to be permanent or at least endure for a considerable time

Includes part of a building-  (R v Walkington)
( B + S v Lethery)
(Norfolk Constabulary)

99
Q

What is the mens rea of burglary ?

A
  1. Intentionally or recklessly trespass (R v Collin) - Use words in scenario to prove
  2. Go through the mens rea of theft GBH criminal offences- with relevant cases

has it been established and applied ? Apply each stage giving reasons

Then conclude is defendant guilty of a S.9(1)(a) burglary

100
Q

what is S.9(1)(b) of Burglary?

A

When a person enters the building as a trespasser and commits the actus reus and mens rea of theft or GBH

101
Q

What is the actus reus and mens rea of S.9(1)(b) under burglary?

A

Same as S.9(1)(a) 

102
Q

Where does the current rule for gross negligence come from?

A

R v Adomako
R v Broughton

A-level Law 👩🏿‍⚖️ (16 decks)

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