MR - Recklessness Flashcards
What offences can recklessness be the MR for
Assault and battery ABH S.47 OAPA Wounding or causing GBH S.20 OAPA Arson Criminal damage
What is recklessness
Recklessness is where D knows there’s a risk of the consequences happening but takes the risk anyway
What does objective mean
Would a reasonable person have foreseen the risk
What does subjective mean
Did D foresee the risk
Cunningham (1957)
D was charged with ‘maliciously administering a noxious thing’ judge told jury malicious meant wicked
COA said malicious meant D had intention or was reckless
Not guilty
Subjective test
What type of recklessness is ONLY recognised by the law
Subjective
When was objective recklessness recognised and abolished
1982 and 2003
Caldwell (1981)
D got drunk and set fire to hotel. Nobody was hurt there was some damage. D was charged under S.1(2) of criminal damage act which requires D intended to endanger or was reckless
HOL reintroduced objective recklessness
They said it could be sub and obj
Elliot v C (1983)
D was a child with learning difficulties. She ran away and poured spirits on the carpet of a shed and set it on fire to keep warm. Charged with arson
Court had to follow previous HOL decision. She was convicted using obj test.
Judge criticised outcome.
R v G (2003)
D’s were children who set fire to newspaper to see if a wheelie bin would melt. Fire spread to shop and caused £1m damage. Judge told jury adult would’ve foreseen risk.
HOL overruled Caldwell and chanced the test back to subjective
Which case was the objective test for recklessness abolished in
R v G (2003)
