General elements of criminal liability

Question 1

ACTUS REUS- PHYSICAL ELEMENT.

Answer 1

D’s act or omission must usually be voluntary. If D has no control over his actions then he is not at fault and hasn’t committed the acts reus.

Question 2

PAGETT? (CAUSATION)

Answer 2

D will be a factual cause of consequence, if the consequence wouldn’t have happened ‘but for’ D’s conduct.

Question 3

BENGE (CAUSATION)

Answer 3

D will be a legal cause of consequence if D’s conduct was more than a ‘minimal’ cause of the consequence. Thus others may contribute to the consequence.

Question 4

THERE MUST BE AN INTERVENING ACT WHICH BREAKS THIS CHAIN OF CAUSATION? PAGETT?

Answer 4

Where D’s conduct causes reasonably foreseeable action by a third party, the chain of causation will remain unbroken.

Question 5

THERE MUST BE AN INTERVENING ACT WHICH BREAKS THIS CHAIN OF CAUSATION? CHESHIRE?

Answer 5

Medical negligence is unlikely to break the chain of causation unless it is so independent of D’s act and in itself so potent in causing death that D’s acts are insignificant.

Question 6

ROBERTS? (CAUSATION)

Answer 6

V’s own conduct is unlikely to break the chain of causation unless it is so daft that a reasonable person would not have foreseen V reacting in that way.

Question 7

BLAUE (CAUSATION)

Answer 7

The chain of causation will not be broken if V has something unusual about them which makes them more vulnerable. D must take V as he finds him. This known as the ‘thin skull rule’.

Question 8

HOW CAN AN OMISSION BE THE BASIS OF THE ACTUS REUS OF A CRIME?

Answer 8

The normal rule is that an omission cannot make a person guilty of an offence.

Question 9

WHAT IS THE EXCEPTIONS TO OMISSION CANNOT MAKE A PERSON GUILTY OF AN OFFENCE?

Answer 9

The common law made require D to act and omitting to do so will satisfy the actus reus.

Question 10

PITTWOOD?

Answer 10

D may be under a contractual duty to act.

Question 11

DPP V SANTANA-BERMUDEZ?

Answer 11

D may be under a duty to take responsible steps to prevent harm resulting from a dangerous situation he has created.

Question 12

GIBBINS AND PROCTOR?

Answer 12

D may be under a family duty to act.

Question 13

STONE AND DOBINSON?

Answer 13

D may be under a duty to act because he has voluntarily promised to care for V.

Question 14

DYTHAM?

Answer 14

D may be under a duty to act through his official position.

Question 15

MENS REA?

Answer 15

Mens rea is the mental element of an offence. Its the ‘guilty mind’.

Question 16

DIRECT INTENT? MOHAN?

Answer 16

D directly intends a result where it is his aim or purpose. D actually desires the result that occurs and sets out to achieve it.

Question 17

INDIRECT INTENT? WOOLLIN?

Answer 17

A court may find that D indirectly intends a result where that result is not desired, but was virtually certain to occur and D knows this.

Question 18

RECKLESSNESS? CUNNINGHAM?

Answer 18

D will have acted recklessly where he knows there was a risk of that result happening, but takes that. risk.

Question 19

TRANSFERRED MALICE? LATIMER?

Answer 19

Where D’s mens rea is directed at one person, but D harms someone else, he can still be guilty. In such cases D’s state of mind is transferred to the actual victim. Either intention or recklessness can be transferred.

Question 20

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF STRICT LIABILITY?

Answer 20

An offence of strict liability means one where the prosecution need not prove mens rea for at least part of the actus reus (or not at all)

Question 21

THE THREE MAIN REASONS FOR HAVING OFFENCES OF STRICT LIABILITY?

Answer 21

1. Strict liability offences help protect society. It makes sure that businesses are run properly.
2. It is easier to enforce strict liability offences as there is no need for the prosecution to prove mens rea.
3. it also saves court time as Ds are more likely to plead guilty so that no trial is required. the fact that D may not be blameworthy ca be taken into account when sentencing.

Question 22

THE MAIN ARGUMENT AGAINST STRICT LIABILITY?

Answer 22

The main argument against strict liability is that it makes people who are not blameworthy guilty. Even those who have taken all possible care will be found guilty and can be punished.

Question 23

WHAT IS THE COINCIDENCE RULE/CONTEMPORANEITY RULE?

Answer 23

Usually in order for an offence yo take place, both actus reus and mens rea must be present at the same time.

Question 24

FAGAN V MPC?

Answer 24

Where there is a continuing act for the actus reus and at some point while that act is still going on D has the necessary mens rea, then the two coincide and D will be guilty.

Question 25

TWO MAIN EXCEPTIONS WHERE D WILL BE STILL GUILTY OF AN OFFENCE EVEN THROUGH THE ACTUS REUS AND MENS REA ARE NOT PRESENT AT THE SAME TIME? CHURCH? DPP V MAJEWSKI?

Answer 25

Where the actus reus is part of some larger transaction, it will be sufficient that D forms mens rea at some point during the transaction: CHURCH.

Where D has voluntarily been drinking and then goes on to commit a crime that can be committed recklessly, his intoxication is not a defence. D is seen as reckless in getting intoxicated in the first place so has the mens rea for the later offence: DPP V MAJEWSKI.