Law of Attempts structure Flashcards
Identify and define?
S1(1) of the Criminal Attempts act 1981 says D is guilty of attempt when he commits an act that is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence. (R v White)
Actus reus of Attempts?
What should be considered under merely preparatory?
When D commits an act that is more than merely preparatory.
Attorney Generals Ref (No1 of 92) - held D need not have performed the last act before the crime proper nor need he have reached the point of ‘no return’.
Guellefer - Quashed - had not embarked on the crime proper.
Geddes - merely preparatory
(R v Campbell too ^)
- Had the accused moved from planning or preparation to execution or implementation ?
- Had the accused done an act showing that he was actually trying to commit the full offence or had they only gotten as far as putting himself in a position/equipping himself to do so?
Cases that had attempt?
Boyle and Boyle - broken lock - found outside the door
R v Tosti - took metal cutting equip, examined padlock - got caught
R v Jones - Murder - gun
Mens rea of attempt?
D mus have intent for the offence attempted (Attorney Gen Ref 79). If the prosecution cannot prove intent then D is not guilty (Easom).
Attempted murder? case?
Must prove intent to murder.
R v Whybrow - wired up wife’s bath to kill her - only got Electric shock
Can recklessness/oblique intent be enough? Can there be conditional attempt (theft)?
No. Recklessness does not suffice.
Can be - if there is something worth stealing
Impossibility? What is it?
Originally the courts held that if the full offence was impossible to commit then D could not be guilty. Under S1.2 and 1.3 of the C.A act 1981 a person may be guilty of attempting to commit an impossible crime - physically impossible crime. R v Shivpuri - attempting to knowingly deal drugs - suitcase was full of dried cabbage leaves.
