Introduction to Criminal Law
Criminal Law is one of the essential core subject areas required for a qualifying law degree.
Crime is a common part of everyday life. Crime is around us in many forms and it is a feature of
everyday news. Thus, most students will be familiar with what each offence is. However, it is
important to understand that focus must be placed on legal principles derived form legislation
and case law, as common conceptions of crime can be very different to its actual elements.
Criminal liability can be imposed in many instances. There is no universal definition of crime in
modern criminal law. This can change over time as a result of social and political influences. It is
also important to differentiate between a criminal and a civil wrong. This module covers the
most popular criminal law offences and will aim to explain and take you through how and why
criminal liability can be imposed on a defendant, giving you an in-depth understanding of the
nature of criminal liability.
There are many offences that will be discussed in this module. They include, for example,
murder, assault, fraud, sexual and property offenses and others. Thus, it is not possible to
provide one definition that encompasses all these criminal offences, considering how each
offence has its own specific elements.
From the chapters that follow, you will be able to recognise whether a liability can be
established only by determining the following three things:
1. Whether the Defendant is responsible for the specific conduct attributable to the
offence in question (actus reus), and:
2. Whether the Defendant had the state of mind (mens rea) necessary, and:
3. Whether or not there is a relevant defence.
Table of Contents
1. Committing an Offence
2. Fatal Offences
3. Non-fatal Offence
4. Property Offences
5. Fraud
6. Sexual Offences
, 7. General Inchoate Offences
8. Parties to Crime
9. Denials & Defences
Committing an Offence
Actus Reus
Elements of an Offence
In order for an individual to be found liable for any offence, three elements must
be satisfied.
There must be guilty conduct by the defendant (actus reus)
The defendant must have a guilty state of mind (mens rea)
There must be no valid defence
In later chapters it will be seen that sometimes a defendant can be guilty of an
offence without a guilty state of mind (strict liability offence, for example), but in
every case, the actus reus must be proved before a conviction can occur.
Although in most cases a defendant is required to do something in order to satisfy
the actus reus, situations where this is not the case will be discussed below.
Additionally, in certain circumstances, the actus reus requires an additional factor
to exist or some specific consequence to follow in order for the actus reus to be
established. Under section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, for
example, the defendant’s actions must wound or cause grievous bodily harm to
the victim. The act of assaulting the victim will not be sufficient to satisfy the actus
reus without this particular consequence. The distinction is described as being a
conduct crime or a result crime.
A further example can be found under section 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act
1971 which provides:
A person who, without lawful excuse destroys or damages property belonging to
another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to
whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an
offence.
,The actus reus of the offence is the destruction or damage of property which
belongs to somebody other than the defendant. It is the result of the defendant’s
actions that satisfy the actus reus rather than the actions themselves, with the
additional circumstance being that the property destroyed or damaged belongs to
somebody other than the defendant. In other words, all three elements/types
of actus reus are included.
Conduct - some action that results in damage to property;
Circumstance - the property belongs to somebody other than the
defendant;
Result - the property is damaged or destroyed.
If this offence is contrasted with the offence of rape, section 1 of the Sexual
Offences Act 2003 provides that:
1. A person (A) commits an offence if -
1. he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another
person (B) with his penis,
2. B does not consent to the penetration, and
3. A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
All that is required for the actus reus to be satisfied in this context, is that the
penetration with the penis occurred, the victim did not consent and the
defendant. It is therefore the conduct of the defendant that satisfies the actus
reus, no particular result is necessary.
Examination Consideration
In all circumstances, it is essential that all elements of the actus reus are satisfied.
This includes the defendant’s conduct, the existence of certain circumstances
and/or a particular result. All of the elements for each offence must be worked
through methodically on the basis of the definition of the offence. This approach
applied to every offence and in whatever circumstances the offences arises. It is
not a matter that is limited to questions on actus reus.
, Liability for Omissions
In most cases, a defendant will be required to act in order to satisfy the actus
reus of an offence; the defendant must do something. There is no general
requirement under English and Welsh law for a person to act. If, for example, a
person sees another drowning and can easily save them by throwing into the
water a nearby buoyancy aid, the person decides not to throw in the aid and the
drowning person dies, the person who could have affected the rescue will not be
guilty of an offence. The potential rescuer is not obliged to act.
There are however, several circumstances where a duty to act is imposed and
where omission satisfies the actus reus of an offence.
Statutory Duty
There are numerous statutory provisions that require an individual to act in a
particular manner and which, if the individual does not act in that manner, cause
the individual to be criminally liable. Under section 7(4) of the Road Traffic Act
1972, for example, it is an offence to fail to provide a specimen of breath when
required to do so by a police officer. Section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
makes it an offence to fail to stop after a road traffic accident. It is also an offence
to fail to keep proper accounts under the provisions of the Companies Act 2006 or
the Value Added Tax Act 1994.
Examination Consideration
It is useful to learn a few of these examples (there are numerous more), because
questions on liability for omission are common.
Duty Arising from a Special Relationship
Care or Control of Children
Section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 makes it an offence for a
parent or any other person over the age of 16 years who has responsibility for a
child under the age of 16 years to wilfully neglect the child. This specifically
includes failing to provide adequate food, clothing or medical care. Whilst this is a
statutory provision and could easily fall within the previous section, it has links to
liability that falls outside the express wording of the Act. Under this provision, a
parent will be liable if they fail to save their child from drowning in the example
Criminal Law is one of the essential core subject areas required for a qualifying law degree.
Crime is a common part of everyday life. Crime is around us in many forms and it is a feature of
everyday news. Thus, most students will be familiar with what each offence is. However, it is
important to understand that focus must be placed on legal principles derived form legislation
and case law, as common conceptions of crime can be very different to its actual elements.
Criminal liability can be imposed in many instances. There is no universal definition of crime in
modern criminal law. This can change over time as a result of social and political influences. It is
also important to differentiate between a criminal and a civil wrong. This module covers the
most popular criminal law offences and will aim to explain and take you through how and why
criminal liability can be imposed on a defendant, giving you an in-depth understanding of the
nature of criminal liability.
There are many offences that will be discussed in this module. They include, for example,
murder, assault, fraud, sexual and property offenses and others. Thus, it is not possible to
provide one definition that encompasses all these criminal offences, considering how each
offence has its own specific elements.
From the chapters that follow, you will be able to recognise whether a liability can be
established only by determining the following three things:
1. Whether the Defendant is responsible for the specific conduct attributable to the
offence in question (actus reus), and:
2. Whether the Defendant had the state of mind (mens rea) necessary, and:
3. Whether or not there is a relevant defence.
Table of Contents
1. Committing an Offence
2. Fatal Offences
3. Non-fatal Offence
4. Property Offences
5. Fraud
6. Sexual Offences
, 7. General Inchoate Offences
8. Parties to Crime
9. Denials & Defences
Committing an Offence
Actus Reus
Elements of an Offence
In order for an individual to be found liable for any offence, three elements must
be satisfied.
There must be guilty conduct by the defendant (actus reus)
The defendant must have a guilty state of mind (mens rea)
There must be no valid defence
In later chapters it will be seen that sometimes a defendant can be guilty of an
offence without a guilty state of mind (strict liability offence, for example), but in
every case, the actus reus must be proved before a conviction can occur.
Although in most cases a defendant is required to do something in order to satisfy
the actus reus, situations where this is not the case will be discussed below.
Additionally, in certain circumstances, the actus reus requires an additional factor
to exist or some specific consequence to follow in order for the actus reus to be
established. Under section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, for
example, the defendant’s actions must wound or cause grievous bodily harm to
the victim. The act of assaulting the victim will not be sufficient to satisfy the actus
reus without this particular consequence. The distinction is described as being a
conduct crime or a result crime.
A further example can be found under section 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act
1971 which provides:
A person who, without lawful excuse destroys or damages property belonging to
another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to
whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an
offence.
,The actus reus of the offence is the destruction or damage of property which
belongs to somebody other than the defendant. It is the result of the defendant’s
actions that satisfy the actus reus rather than the actions themselves, with the
additional circumstance being that the property destroyed or damaged belongs to
somebody other than the defendant. In other words, all three elements/types
of actus reus are included.
Conduct - some action that results in damage to property;
Circumstance - the property belongs to somebody other than the
defendant;
Result - the property is damaged or destroyed.
If this offence is contrasted with the offence of rape, section 1 of the Sexual
Offences Act 2003 provides that:
1. A person (A) commits an offence if -
1. he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another
person (B) with his penis,
2. B does not consent to the penetration, and
3. A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
All that is required for the actus reus to be satisfied in this context, is that the
penetration with the penis occurred, the victim did not consent and the
defendant. It is therefore the conduct of the defendant that satisfies the actus
reus, no particular result is necessary.
Examination Consideration
In all circumstances, it is essential that all elements of the actus reus are satisfied.
This includes the defendant’s conduct, the existence of certain circumstances
and/or a particular result. All of the elements for each offence must be worked
through methodically on the basis of the definition of the offence. This approach
applied to every offence and in whatever circumstances the offences arises. It is
not a matter that is limited to questions on actus reus.
, Liability for Omissions
In most cases, a defendant will be required to act in order to satisfy the actus
reus of an offence; the defendant must do something. There is no general
requirement under English and Welsh law for a person to act. If, for example, a
person sees another drowning and can easily save them by throwing into the
water a nearby buoyancy aid, the person decides not to throw in the aid and the
drowning person dies, the person who could have affected the rescue will not be
guilty of an offence. The potential rescuer is not obliged to act.
There are however, several circumstances where a duty to act is imposed and
where omission satisfies the actus reus of an offence.
Statutory Duty
There are numerous statutory provisions that require an individual to act in a
particular manner and which, if the individual does not act in that manner, cause
the individual to be criminally liable. Under section 7(4) of the Road Traffic Act
1972, for example, it is an offence to fail to provide a specimen of breath when
required to do so by a police officer. Section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
makes it an offence to fail to stop after a road traffic accident. It is also an offence
to fail to keep proper accounts under the provisions of the Companies Act 2006 or
the Value Added Tax Act 1994.
Examination Consideration
It is useful to learn a few of these examples (there are numerous more), because
questions on liability for omission are common.
Duty Arising from a Special Relationship
Care or Control of Children
Section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 makes it an offence for a
parent or any other person over the age of 16 years who has responsibility for a
child under the age of 16 years to wilfully neglect the child. This specifically
includes failing to provide adequate food, clothing or medical care. Whilst this is a
statutory provision and could easily fall within the previous section, it has links to
liability that falls outside the express wording of the Act. Under this provision, a
parent will be liable if they fail to save their child from drowning in the example
