Criminal revision law notes:
Scenario answer:
Identify who is liable and for what.
Actus reus (AR).
The act.
After the case of … are enough to fulfil the actus reus of …
How the actus reus has been met – cases.
Causation issue.
Mens rea (MR).
Intent.
Transferred malice?
Omission:
An omission can’t make a person guilty of an offence. An omission is a failure to act under
English law. It’s not usually an offence in itself. Example: If a stranger is drowning and
someone is able to save them but doesn’t, it’s not an offence. However, if they have a duty to
act and down the actus reus can be formed. Example: A lifeguard doesn’t try to save a
drowning victim would be liable for an offence depending on what happened to the victim.
Miller: Creating a dangerous situation.
Dytham: Public position.
Pittwood: Contractual duty.
Stone & Dobinson: Assumed responsibility.
Proctor & Gibbons: Parental.
Santana-Bermudez: Not tell police officer about needles.
Bland: Life support off.
Good Samaritan Law:
Must help people in need of assistance even if you don’t know them.
Pro: Helping people, morally correct.
Con: Put yourself in danger, you could help injured people more.
Causation:
Factual causation: Commonly known as the “but for” test, but for the actions of the
defendant, would the victim have suffered ham or injury. Example: Pagett (1983), victim
wouldn’t have died but for the defendant using her as a human shield in a shootout.
Legal causation: “Generally guided by the notice of blameworthiness”. The act must be
operating (still taking place) and substantial (more than minimal) cause of the consequence.
Smith: Legal causation – S47 and medical negligence. Example: Smith (1959) stabbed in a
fight. Received poor medical care, but the original stab wound was still operating and more
than minimal cause of death.
, Actions of third party: Includes medical profession. Example: Jordan (1956) Court of Appeal
(COA) held that the jury considered evidence showing that v was given a drug they were
allergic to after being almost healed from a stab wound – medical care at fault. So long as the
original act is still operating and substantial then d would still be liable.
Action of victim: Problem when victim responds is a way that is completely disproportionate
or not foreseeable. Roberts: Victim acted rationally when escaping from a moving car so d
liable. William: Victim acted irrationally when escaping from a moving car, chain of causation
broken so defendant was not liable.
Thin skull rule: Takes effect where victims death is accelerated because of a pre-existing
medical condition. No defence that the defendant doesn’t know about v’s condition. You
have to take the victim as you find them – Blaue.
Pagett: Factual causation.
Roberts: Rational – S47 escape clauses.
Jordan: Palpably wrong medical care 3rd party – S47 medical negligence.
Blaue: Thin skull rule – S47 thin skull clauses.
White: Factual causation.
Cheshire: Exaggerates legal causation – S47 medical negligence.
Deer: Intervening act of victim.
William: Irrational.
Malcherek: Turn off life support.
Larsonneur: State of affairs – Involuntary act.
State of affairs:
The actus reus can be a state of affairs for which the defendant is responsible.
Example: Having an offensive weapon in a public place. The defendant doesn’t have to do
anything with the weapon itself, just having the weapon is enough to be guilty.
Conduct crimes:
For many crimes it isn’t necessary for any consequence to be proved.
These are known as “conduct crimes”.
Merely doing the act is sufficient to fulfil these crimes, there doesn’t need to be a
consequence.
Example: Theft where the prohibited conduct to be proven is that the defendant
appropriated properly belonging to another.
Not necessary to prove any consequence.
Consequence crimes:
These crimes require a consequence.
Example: Victim needs to apprehend violence to fulfil the offence of assault, therefore if you
pointed a replica gun at someone who knew it was a replica and saw it as a joke, no offence
has been committed.
Scenario answer:
Identify who is liable and for what.
Actus reus (AR).
The act.
After the case of … are enough to fulfil the actus reus of …
How the actus reus has been met – cases.
Causation issue.
Mens rea (MR).
Intent.
Transferred malice?
Omission:
An omission can’t make a person guilty of an offence. An omission is a failure to act under
English law. It’s not usually an offence in itself. Example: If a stranger is drowning and
someone is able to save them but doesn’t, it’s not an offence. However, if they have a duty to
act and down the actus reus can be formed. Example: A lifeguard doesn’t try to save a
drowning victim would be liable for an offence depending on what happened to the victim.
Miller: Creating a dangerous situation.
Dytham: Public position.
Pittwood: Contractual duty.
Stone & Dobinson: Assumed responsibility.
Proctor & Gibbons: Parental.
Santana-Bermudez: Not tell police officer about needles.
Bland: Life support off.
Good Samaritan Law:
Must help people in need of assistance even if you don’t know them.
Pro: Helping people, morally correct.
Con: Put yourself in danger, you could help injured people more.
Causation:
Factual causation: Commonly known as the “but for” test, but for the actions of the
defendant, would the victim have suffered ham or injury. Example: Pagett (1983), victim
wouldn’t have died but for the defendant using her as a human shield in a shootout.
Legal causation: “Generally guided by the notice of blameworthiness”. The act must be
operating (still taking place) and substantial (more than minimal) cause of the consequence.
Smith: Legal causation – S47 and medical negligence. Example: Smith (1959) stabbed in a
fight. Received poor medical care, but the original stab wound was still operating and more
than minimal cause of death.
, Actions of third party: Includes medical profession. Example: Jordan (1956) Court of Appeal
(COA) held that the jury considered evidence showing that v was given a drug they were
allergic to after being almost healed from a stab wound – medical care at fault. So long as the
original act is still operating and substantial then d would still be liable.
Action of victim: Problem when victim responds is a way that is completely disproportionate
or not foreseeable. Roberts: Victim acted rationally when escaping from a moving car so d
liable. William: Victim acted irrationally when escaping from a moving car, chain of causation
broken so defendant was not liable.
Thin skull rule: Takes effect where victims death is accelerated because of a pre-existing
medical condition. No defence that the defendant doesn’t know about v’s condition. You
have to take the victim as you find them – Blaue.
Pagett: Factual causation.
Roberts: Rational – S47 escape clauses.
Jordan: Palpably wrong medical care 3rd party – S47 medical negligence.
Blaue: Thin skull rule – S47 thin skull clauses.
White: Factual causation.
Cheshire: Exaggerates legal causation – S47 medical negligence.
Deer: Intervening act of victim.
William: Irrational.
Malcherek: Turn off life support.
Larsonneur: State of affairs – Involuntary act.
State of affairs:
The actus reus can be a state of affairs for which the defendant is responsible.
Example: Having an offensive weapon in a public place. The defendant doesn’t have to do
anything with the weapon itself, just having the weapon is enough to be guilty.
Conduct crimes:
For many crimes it isn’t necessary for any consequence to be proved.
These are known as “conduct crimes”.
Merely doing the act is sufficient to fulfil these crimes, there doesn’t need to be a
consequence.
Example: Theft where the prohibited conduct to be proven is that the defendant
appropriated properly belonging to another.
Not necessary to prove any consequence.
Consequence crimes:
These crimes require a consequence.
Example: Victim needs to apprehend violence to fulfil the offence of assault, therefore if you
pointed a replica gun at someone who knew it was a replica and saw it as a joke, no offence
has been committed.
