Mens Rea of attempt&Attempting the impossible Flashcards
For an attempt, what must the defendant normally have?
must normally have the same intention as would be required for the full offence.
What would happen if the prosecution could not prove D had the intention?
then D is not guilty of the attempt
Which case shows that if the prosecution could not prove D had intention then D is not guilty of the attempt?
Easom 1971
In what case did the courts make a similar decision to that in Easom that if the prosecution could not prove that D had intention then D is not guilty of an attempt?
Husseyn 1977
What happened in the case of Husseyn 1977?
D and another man were loitering near the back of a van. D was convicted of attempting to steal some sub aqua equipment in the van. COA quashed conviction
D and another man were loitering near the back of a van. D was convicted of attempting to steal some sub aqua equipment in the van. COA quashed conviction
What case is this?
Husseyn 1977
What happened in the case of Easom 1971?
D picked up a womans handbag, looked through it then put it back on the floor without removing anything. Conviction for theft was quashed as there was no evidence than D intended to permanently deprive the owner of the bag.
D picked up a womans handbag, looked through it then put it back on the floor without removing anything. Conviction for theft was quashed as there was no evidence than D intended to permanently deprive the owner of the bag.
What case is this?
Easom 1971
Why can the decisions by the COA be criticised in Easom 1971 and Husseyn 1977?
this is because surely the defendant intended to steal something and and so the fact they did not find anything worth stealing should not impact on their guilt for attempting to steal
Which case resolved the problems found in Easom 1971 and Husseyn 1977?
Attorneys General Reference 1979
What happened in the case of Attorneys General Rederence 1979 which resolved the problems found in Easom 1971 and Husseyn 1977?
the COA decided that if D had a conditional intent then D could be charged with an attempt to steal some or all of the contents. This is a technical procedural way around the problem
What is an example of conditional intent which the COA decided could make D guilty of attempting a crime in Attorney’s General Reference 1979?
conditional intent for example is if D intends to steal if there was anything worth stealing
Under the rules of Attorney Generals Reference 1979 conditional intent, in which 2 cases would D be charged with attempting to steal some or all of the contents of the bag?
Easom 1971
Hussyen 1977
What does the mens rea for attempted murder need providing?
providing a higher level of intention than for the full offence of murder
What level of mens rea does the prosecution need to prove D’s guilt in the full offence of murder?
that the defendant intended to either kill or case GBH
For attempted murder, what does the prosecution need to prove for intention?
they must prove intention to kill only (not GBH)
What case shows that the prosecution always has to prove the higher level of intention for attempted murder?
Whybrow 1951
What happened in the case of Whybrow 1951 which is an example of how the prosecution myst have to prove the higher level of intention for attempted murder?
D wired up wifes bath and caused her an electric shock
D wired up wifes bath and caused her an electric shock. Convicted of attempted murder. On appeal the court upheld conviction but criticised the trial judges summing up and stressed that only intention to kill was sufficient for the mens rea of attempted murder
What case is this?
Whybrow 1951
What case decided that recklessness was not sufficient for the mens rea?
Millard and Vernon 1987
What happened in the case of Millard and Vernon 1987?
Ds repeatedly pushed against a wooden fence on a stand at a football ground. The prosecution alleged that they were trying to break it and they were convicted of attempted criminal damage. COA quashed conviction
Ds repeatedly pushed against a wooden fence on a stand at a football ground. The prosecution alleged that they were trying to break it and they were convicted of attempted criminal damage. COA quashed conviction
What case is this?
Millard and Vernon 1987
What is not normally sufficient mens rea for an attempt?
recklessness
Which case illustrates that recklessness can be sufficient for one part of the offence for an attempt?
Attorney Generals Reference 1994
What happened in the case of Attorney Generals Reference 1994 ?
D threw a petrol bomb towards a car containing 4 men, the bomb missed and smashed harmlessly against a wall. D was charged with attempting to commit arson with intent to endanger life. D was acquitted and COA said it was only necessary to prove that D was reckless as to whether life would be endangered.
What is attempting the impossible?
this is where a person may intend to commit an offence and may do everything they possibly can to commit it, but in fact the offence is impossible to commit.
Example of attempting the impossible?
D goes into V’s room and stabs V as he lies in bed. In fact, V died of a heart attack 2 hours before D stabbed him. D merely stabbed a dead body. Murdering V is physically impossible so D cannot be guilty of murder, but can D be guilty of attempted murder?
What was the law held by the HOL on attempting the impossible before the 1981?
they held that where a crime was legally or physically impossible to commit, then the defendant could not be guilty of attempting to commit it.
What Act stopped the common law idea that where a crime was legally or physically impossible to commit, then the defendant could not be guilty of attempting to commit it?
Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.1(2)
What does the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.1(2) intend?
it intends to close the loophole of impossibility and make defendants guilty of an attempt even though the full offence was impossible
Which case did the HOL have to consider the Criminal Attempts Act 1981?
Anderton v Ryan 1985
What happened in the case of Anderton v Ryan 1985
Mrs Ryan bought a video recorder cheaply, she thought it was stolen this she later admitted to the police who were investigating a burglary at her home. Her conviction was quashed as the video recorder was not stolen. Although Mrs Ryan went beyond merely preparatory acts, her acts were innocent.
Mrs Ryan bought a video recorder cheaply, she thought it was stolen this she later admitted to the police who were investigating a burglary at her home. Her conviction was quashed as the video recorder was not stolen. Although Mrs Ryan went beyond merely preparatory acts, her acts were innocent.
What case is this?
Anderton v Ryan 1985
in which case did the HOL overrule Anderton v Ryan 1985?
Shivpuri 1986
What happened in the case of Shivpuri 1986?
D agreed to receive a suitcase which he thought contained prohibited drugs, suitcase only contained snuff and harmless vegetable matter. D was convicted of attempting to be knowingly concerned in the dealing of prohibited drugs.
D agreed to receive a suitcase which he thought contained prohibited drugs, suitcase only contained snuff and harmless vegetable matter. D was convicted of attempting to be knowingly concerned in the dealing of prohibited drugs.
What case is this?
Shivpuri 1986
Under what section of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 meant that as D in Shivpuri 1986 intended dealing in drugs, and so intended to commit that offence?
s.1(2)
In what case did the HOL accept that their decision had been wrong and used the Practise Statement to overrule that decision?
Anderton v Ryan 1985
