Intro Flashcards

1
Q

What are the ingredients of a criminal conviction? (8)

A
  1. A court with procedural / technical jurisdiction
  2. A response-able agent (one who is capable of responding to the criminal law’s guidance and explaining her actions in court, if needed)
  3. Who is also capable of voluntary conduct
  4. Is exercising that capacity for voluntary conduct
  5. Performs the actus reus of an offence (i.e. conduct that constitutes or causes the harm that the criminal law is designed to prevent)
  6. The mens rea of the offence (the mental states identified as being sufficiently blameworthy for the defendant to have when performing the actus reus for criminal punishment to follow)
    a. Tag-on liability which can be inchoate liability: when a pro tanto offence (described in rows 1-6 above) need not have been completed for there to be liability for an offence e.g. attempts, conspiracy, liability under ss.44-46 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (Not in the syllabus)
    b. complicity (or accessorial) liability: The liability of D for assisting or encouraging some other person, P, to commit a pro tanto offence
  7. Absence of a justification
  8. Absence of an excuse
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the related defensive pleas? (8)

A
  1. Limitation, double jeopardy
  2. Infancy, insanity, unfitness to plead
  3. Automatism
  4. Non-voluntary conduct (e.g. tripping, falling)
  5. Consent (in some cases), alibi, and other denials that the defendant brought about the actus reus
  6. Some mistakes, intoxication (leading to lack of mens rea), other denials that the defendant had the requisite mens rea etc.
    a. All the defensive pleas mentioned above and below, plus some defensive pleas specific to the add-on liability concerned
  7. Self-defence, defence of property, lawful arrest and prevention of crime, necessity
  8. Duress, statutory excuses
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Which of these ingredients must be present to convict?

A

Every ingredient

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

How can D get an acquittal?

A

If a single defence applies

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

What does almost every criminal offence have?

A

an actus reus and a mens rea

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

What does actus reus mean?
example

A

It spells out what the defendant must actually do or cause to commit an offence
e.g. to obtain property by making a false statement

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

Where does actus reus come from?
What is the translation?

A

Latin
Guilty Act

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

What does actus reus also take into account?

A

any incriminating circumstances that must exist for an offence to be satisfied

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

What will a crime require in almost all instances?

A

the defendant to perform some conduct - a positive act

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

What can Parliament choose to do?
What must it ensure, to do this?

A

can decide to create liability where D has no control over her actions of circumstances
it must make its intention very clear

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

When do these situations arise?

A

where the offence is merely ‘found’ in certain circumstances

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

What does mens rea mean?

A

This spells out the state of mind that the defendant must have had at the time of the actus reus

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

Where does mens rea come from?
Translation?

A

Latin
Guilty mind

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

What must the defendant have done to be convicted?
For which offences?

A

made a blameworthy choice
more serious ones

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Sometimes, what can suffice for conviction?

A

D’s negligence as to their conduct

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

Can D be convicted even without negligence?

A

Yes
known as offences of strict liability

17
Q

What 2 things are different when it comes to one’s mens rea?

A
  1. having to intend or foresee a consequence of one’s actions / knowing/suspecting the facts relating to one’s conduct
  2. Knowing whether one’s conduct will amount to a criminal offence under the law of the land
18
Q

What is not an excuse for criminal liability?

A

Ignorance of the law

19
Q

What is required for an offence?

A

contemporaneity of the actus reus and the mens rea

20
Q

How can the defendant avoid conviction? 2 ways
examples of the first?

A

by raising a defence or a defensive plea
e.g. duress, self-defence, necessity

21
Q

What does the operation of the defensive plea prevent?

A

prevents D from being criminally liable for an offence
even if actus reus and mens rea are present

22
Q

What is debated about defensive pleas?
examples of defensive pleas?

A

whether they are properly classified as defences in the proper technical sense
insanity, automatism, intoxication

23
Q

What right applies to retrospective law?

A

right not to be punished by virtue of retrospective law

24
Q

Where does this right come from?

A

Common Law
under Article 7 of ECHR

25
What can the judiciary not use their power to do?
to develop the common law in a way that retrospectively creates a new criminal offence
26
What can be done retrospectively?
it is possible to take away some defences retrospectively
27
When can it be done? example of case?
only in very specific circumstances SW and CR v United Kingdom
28
What does Article 7 do? From which convention is this article?
Leaves it open for judiciary to favour the defendant from the ECHR
29
How does Article 7 do this?
by expanding the scope of a defence -> court can develop new common law defences where appropriate
30
What more general principle does this follow?
judicial restraint
31
What does this principle lead to?
courts are reluctant to make new law, regardless of who the argued-for change may benefit
32
Is this an absolute restraint? examples of cases?
No. R v Kingston & C v DPP
33
what considerations does the House of Lords make when judicially changing the law? case example
5 1. is the solution obvious 2. would reform be better left to Parliament 3. Is the issue socially contentious 4. Would the change result in fundamental legal doctrines being set aside 5. Would judicial law-making provide clarity and finality R (on the application of Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice