Non-fatal Offences Flashcards

1
Q

What is actus Reus?

A
  • Physical element to a crime.
  • It must be voluntary.
    -If it wasn’t voluntary, they dont satisfy the actus Reus.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Case example for Actus Reus.

A

Hill v Baxter
- ignored a road sign and crashed.
- convicted of the crime

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

What are omissions?

A

Situations where an individual fails to act when he/she is legally obligated to

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

What is the type of omissions?

A

Duty undertaken voluntarily
- taking the responsibility to care for someone

Duty to act as D set in motion a chain of events
- creating a dangerous situation

Public duty through official position

Termination of duty
- doctors choosing to stop treating a patient if it’s in the best interest of the patient

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

Case study for duty undertaken voluntarily

A

R v stone and dobison
- failed to provide care for elder sister. She died and D was guilty.

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

Case for duty to act in a motion of a chain of events

A

R v miller
- his mattress set in fire
- he went into another room
- found guilty of arson as he had a duty to act but didn’t

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

Case for duty through a official position

A

R v Dytham
- police officer saw two people fighting
- he chose to ignore it
- failed to act on his duty

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

Case study for Termination of duty

A

R v Bland
- victim in a bad state with no chance of improvement
- court said he could terminate his duty of care and not be liable for the death

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

What is causation?

A

The action that caused the result/casualty.

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

What are the two types of causation?

A

Factual causation
- the ‘but for’ test (would the result have occurred without Ds actions?)
- R v White- put cyanide in mums drink, she died of a heart attack attack before drinking it. D not guilty as she had died before, so the but for test didn’t apply

Legal causation
- Ds actions were the substancial cause and there was no intervening event
- R v Pagett- shoot out with police. Used preg gf as a shield.

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

What is novus actus intervinus?

A

An intervening act which breaks the chain of causation, causing them to now be responsible for the injury’s/death

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

What are the cases for novus actus intervinus- act of a 3rd party?

A

R v smith- v was stabbed and received bad hospital care. D is still responsible

R v Jordan- Doc gave v med that they were allergic to. They died. Doctor is responsible as the death was due to the medicine

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

What is the case study for novus actus Reus- victims own actions?

A

If it is unreasonably forseable (can be predicted) then it doesn’t break the chain of causation.

R V Roberts- d made sexual advances towards v. V jumper out the car. This was reasonably forseable as v was trying to escape. D is guilty.

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

Case for noveus actus intervinus- unpredictable/ act of god

A

If the injury or death was due to extreme weather (earthquake, tsunami)

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

What is the thin skull rule?

A

If v has a medical condition (ex- brittle bone syndrome) which makes the injury more severe than to a normal person, d is guilty for the full extent.

They must take the victim as they are found

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

Case study for thin skull rule

A

R v bleau-
V refused blood transfusion bc of religion, and died. They take the victim as they are found, so d was guilty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is men’s rea?

A

The mental element of an offence.
D must have the minimum level of men’s rea for the offence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Assault- act?

A

S39 criminal justice act 1988

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Assault- ar

A

Cause v to apprehend the infliction of unlawful, unlawful force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Assault- case

A

R v Constanza- written words satisfy the requirement

21
Q

Assault- mr

A

Intention or recklessness as to the assault

22
Q

Assault- mr cases

A

Intention- Mohan
Recklessness- Cunningham

23
Q

Battery- law

A

S39 criminal justice act 1988

24
Q

Battery- ar

A

Application of unlawful force onto another person

25
Battery- case
Collins v Wilcock- any touching can amount to battery even the slightest touch
26
Battery- mr
Intention/ recklessness as the the battery
27
Battery- mr case
Intention- mohan Recklessness- Cunningham
28
Difference between assault and battery
Assault- - causing someone to fear - ex- shouting threats to someone Battery- - the act of applying the unlawful force -ex- spitting on someone
29
Abh- law
S47 Offences against the persons act 1861
30
Abh- ar
Assault/battery occasioning bodily harm
31
Abh- case
Dpp v smith
32
Abh- causation
Factual- but for- r v white Legal- minimal and substancial cause- r v smith
33
Abh- miller definition *must include
Actual bodily harm includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the v
34
Abh- mr
Intention or recklessness for assault or battery
35
Abh- mr case
Intention- mohan Recklessness- cunningham
36
Gbh- law
S20 and s18 offences against the persons act 1861
37
Gbh- case definition
Dpp v smith- ‘really serious harm’
38
Gbh s20- ar
To inflict gbh
39
Gbh s20- ar case
Dica- biological harm can be gbh
40
Gbh s20- mr
Intention or recklessness as to some harm
41
S20- wounding definition
A wound which causes bleeding outside of the body
42
S20- wounding- ar
To wound
43
S20 wounding- mr
Intention or recklessness as to some harm
44
S18- gbh ar
To cause gbh
45
S18- gbh mr
Intention to cause gbh
46
S18 gbh mr case
R v Morrison- COA stated the word ‘maliciously’ is used for this part. The prosecution must prove that d either intended the injury or realised there was a risk of injury but took it anyways
47
S18- wounding ar
To wound
48
S18 wounding mr
Intention to cause gbh