Paper 1 - The Legal System & Criminal Law: Section B - The Criminal System Flashcards
What is ‘actus reus’?
It’s a ‘constituent element of crime’ - ‘guilty act’
What is ‘mens rea’?
It’s the ‘intention or knowledge of wrong doing that constitutes crime’ - guilty mind
What is the ‘Burden of Proof’
The basis for imposing liability in criminal law is that
the defendant must be proved to have committed
the guilty act whilst having had the guilty state of
mind for the crime that they have been charged
with. The prosecution must prove that the defendant is
guilty.
What is the ‘Standard of Proof’
The prosecution must prove that the crime has
been committed ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
If this cannot be proved then the defendant will be
acquitted.
What two elements mean that a person is guilty of a crime?
In order for a person to be found guilty of a criminal offence
the prosecution have to prove two elements.
ACTUS REUS + MENS REA = CRIMINAL OFFENCE
What are three forms of actus reus?
- An act
- An omission (failure to act)
- A state of affairs
Voluntary Act: Hill v Baxter (1958)
Held: an involuntary action does not form the actus reus of a
crime.
The court stated examples of situations of where the
driver would not be acting voluntarily, e.g. being stung
by a swarm of bees, sneezing or being hit on the head
by a stone.
Omission: R v Pittwood (1902)
The defendant (D) was a gatekeeper at a railway station. He forgot to shut the gate when he went for his lunch. Due to this someone crossed the railway line & was hit & killed by a train.
Held: D was convicted - his omission had caused the death of
the victim.
Duty through a contract to close the gate.
Omission: R v Gibbens and Proctor (1918)
A father and his new wife omitted to feed his child, who then died.
Held: Guilty
Duty through a relationship to feed the child.
What are examples of Parliament imposing a duty to act?
Parliament imposes a duty to act:
Seatbelt – Road Traffic Act
Neglect – Children and Young Persons Act 1933
Voluntarily Act/ Omission: Stone and Dobinson (1977)
D’s (of low intelligence) omitted to care for Stone’s elderly sister who then died
Held: Guilty of manslaughter
D’s were convicted because they took on the duty voluntarily
Omission: R v Dytham (1979)
Police Officer failed to intervene as he saw a man being kicked to death
Held: Guilty
Duty through an official position
Omission: R v Miller (1983)
Squatter accidentally started fire, omitted to put it out or summon help and moved to another room
Held: Guilty of criminal damage through setting in a motion chain of events
Duty to minimise the harmful effects of the fire
What is State of Affairs?
- Very rare situations where the defendant is
convicted even though they didn’t act voluntarily - e.g. Road Traffic Act 1988 ‘in charge of motor vehicle
whilst unfit to drive” - Phrases like ‘being found’, ‘being in possession’ &
‘being in charge’ are all states of affairs
State of Affairs: R v Larsonneur (1933)
When she landed in the UK she was immediately arrested and charged with ‘being an alien’ of the state.
She was convicted because she was an alien who had been refused
leave to land and was found in the UK.
What is ‘Causation’?
Causation is the the coincidence of Actus reus and Mens rea
What is ‘factual causation’?
The ‘but for ‘ test is used – but for the defendant’s act, would the
consequence have occurred?
The defendant can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened ‘but for’ his act.
What is ‘legal causation’?
D’s act must be the ‘operating and substantial cause’ of the
injury/death…or at least there must be a more than ‘slight and trifling link’.
This is a test to find the link between the defendant’s act and the consequence.
What is ‘novus actus interveniens’?
This means ‘new act intervening’ – this breaks the chain of causation.
Factual causation: R v Pagett (1983)
D was guilty as his actions had ‘caused’ her death. But for him using her a human shield, she would not have died.
Factual causation: R v White (1910)
D not guilty of murder as he had not caused her death. ‘But for’ his actions, his mother would have died anyway
Factual causation: R v Hughes (2013)
The Supreme Court quashed the conviction as D’s driving did not ‘cause’ the death because his driving was faultless.