general elements of criminal liability Flashcards
what can the actus reus be?
an act, an omission or a state of affairs.
what must the acts reus be? give a case
the actus reus must be voluntary . hill v baxter
what is the general rule regarding omissions?
an omission cannot be the AR of an offence.
what is the exception to the general rule about omissions?
the AR of an offence can be an omission where there is a failure to act when there is a duty to act.
what are the 6 situations that a duty to act can exist in? include cases.
a contractual duty ( Pittwood)
a statutory duty (Road Traffic Act 1988)
a duty because of a relationship (gibbons and Proctor)
a duty to care which has been taken on voluntarily (Stone and Dobinson)
a duty through an official position (Dytham)
a duty which arises where the defendant has created a dangerous situation ( miller) (Evans)
what is meant by state of affairs?
include a case.
instances where a defendant may be found guilty because of actions against his will. (DPP v Winzar)
what are the two types of causation?
factual and legal
explain factual causation
factual causation concerns the “but for” test where the defendant can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened “but for” his conduct
which cases support factual causation
pagett and white. Hughes established that the “but for” test alone is not enough.
explain legal causation and include a case
the defendant can be guilty if he was the operating and substantial cause of the consequence which means he was a more than minimal cause. smith.
what does novus actus interveniens mean?
a new intervening act that is not reasonably foreseeable that breaks the chain of causation under legal causation.
what are the 4 rules you should consider when discussing novus actus interveniens , include their cases.
- victims own act : Roberts, Corbett
- act of a third party/contribution of others : Pagett
- medical negligence : Cheshire , Jordan
- the thin skull rule : Blaue
is motive relevant?
no, steane
what is the highest level of mens rea?
intention
what are the two types of intention? which cases define them?
direct/specific defined in Mohan “ the defendant makes a decision to bring about a particular consequence”
indirect/oblique defined in Woolin / Moloney “ where the consequences of the defendants actions are a virtual reality and the defendant appreciates that this is the case”
how did Matthews and Alleyne refine indirect intention?
“foresight of consequences” in itself is not intention but it is evidence from which the jury can determine if there was intention.
explain subjective recklessness
it is a lower level of mens rea than intention, Cunningham defines it as where the defendant foresees a risk of the consequence and carries on regardless . parameter defined that recklessness is subjective.
explain negligence , what case defined it
where the defendant fails to meet the standards of the reasonable person, adomako
what is the name of the office where there is a high level of negligence?
gross negligence manslaughter
what type of crime does not require mens rea?
strict liability offences
explain the principle of transferred malice
where a crime which is intended for one person falls on another by accident , the defendants men rea towards the intended victim is transferred to the actual victim.
which cases support the principle of transferred malice?
Latimer and Mitchell
what does pembliton state about transferred malice?
the mens rea can only be transferred if the crime intended and crime committed are the same
what is the general principle of the AR and MR of a crime?
both the actus reus and mens rea must coincide, be present at the same time… at some point if the AR is a series pf acts/ a long continuing act
