1
Criminal Law. Lecture 2
Principles of Criminal Liability I: Actus Reus
What is a crime?
-Generally accepted that a criminal act usually involves a ‘public wrong’
-public wrong: acts that have a harmful effect on the public at large as opposed to private
interests (e.g: a party to a contract)
-‘crime is crime bc it consists of wrongdoing which directly and in serious degree threatens
the security or well-being of society’ – Allen C. (1931) ‘the nature of crime’ journal of society
of comparative legislation
What is criminal liability?
-person will be considered to have criminal liability if they are put on trial and found guilty
of committing a criminal offence
-conduct may b deemed criminal by statue (act of parliament) or by common law
-if a person is charged with a criminal offence the prosecution will normally be brought by
the crown prosecution service (cps) in the name of the crown
-the court (either magistrates or crown court)’ will decide the guilt of the defendant (the
person being charged)
-the prosecution bears the burden of proof for establishing the guilt of anyone who is
charged with a criminal offence (defendant) if this cannot b done then there can be no
conviction (guilty verdict) – Woolmington v DPP [1935]
-the prosecution must prove the defendants guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’
Actus Reus of a criminal offence
-fundamental principle of English criminal law that a person may not be convicted of a crime
unless they have behaved in an unlawful way
-defendant cannot be convicted of a criminal offence based on their thoughts alone, there
must also b a criminal act/failure to act
-every crim offence has its own actus reus , if it has not been performed then no offence will
have been committed
-in criminal trials the burden of proof will be on the prosecution to prove ‘beyond
reasonable doubt’ that d performed actus reus if this cannot b done, the d will not b
criminally liable for the offence with which they have been charged
3 types of Actus Reus element
-conduct (where d performs a positive act or omission) e.g: perjury contains conduct
element
-consequences (where d causes a result) murder is a ‘result’ crime
-circumstances (where certain circumstances exist which lead to liability) theft:property
must belong to another, rape: absence of consent
e.g: theft (conduct + circumstances), murder ( circumstances, conduct + consequences)
(( State of affairs crimes have no conduct or consequence elements but depend upon the
existence of a set of circumstances ))
, 2
Requirement of voluntariness
-general rule: actus reus elements of an offence must b voluntary in order for criminal
liability to be imposed, where actus reus is involuntarily performed, there is no criminal
liability.
- Kay v Butterworth [1945] 173 LT 191 : “A person… who, through no fault of his own,
becomes unconscious while driving, for example, by being struck by a stone, or by being
taken ill, ought not to be liable at criminal law” (obiter dicta per Humphreys J)
- “[I]n Kay v. Butterworth... the judge, after emphasizing that drowsiness or sleep would be
no excuse, said that ‘he did not mean to say that a person should be made liable at criminal
law who through no fault of his own became unconscious while driving; for example, if he
were struck by a stone or overcome by a sudden illness; or the car was temporarily out of
control by his being attacked by a swarm of bees’” (per Lord Goddard CJ in Hill v Baxter
[1958] 1 QB 277).
- “A blow from a stone or an attack by a swarm of bees I think introduces some conception
akin to novus actus interveniens”. (per Lord Goddard CJ in Hill v Baxter [1958] 1 QB 277).
Circumstances – State of Affairs crimes
-most offences require voluntary conduct on the part of the accused to establish their actus
reus, there are some offences which prohibit the existence of a state of affairs, sometimes
people can find themselves in a prohibited situation without having put themselves in that
state. No mens rea is required for conviction. These offences are quite rare.
-Offences of absolute liability are “state of affairs” crime because they are entirely
dependent upon the existence of surrounding circumstances but require no conduct from the
D.
-Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent [1983], The Times, 28 March – being drunk on a highway
(s.12, Licensing Act 1872)
-Larsonneur [1933] 97 JP 206 – being illegally in the UK (Aliens Order 1920)
Actus Reus of a criminal offence
-general rule in English law is that criminal liability cannot arise from an individuals failure to
act
-actus reus of an offence can only be performed by way of a voluntary positive action, rather
than an omission
-the actus reus doctrine requires an action of some sort: smth done by the defendant
-contrast approach in other countries like france and germany for e.g: if u see someone
drowning and u can save him but u don’t save him, then that is an omission/failure to act
Whether there should be a general duty to rescue: conventional and social responsibility
view
-conventional:
A should not b compelled to save b
A should not b encouraged to interfere in b’s life, the law values individual autonomy and
liberty
Doing a positive criminal act with bad consequences is morally more blameworthy than
omitting to act and causing the same consequences
Criminal Law. Lecture 2
Principles of Criminal Liability I: Actus Reus
What is a crime?
-Generally accepted that a criminal act usually involves a ‘public wrong’
-public wrong: acts that have a harmful effect on the public at large as opposed to private
interests (e.g: a party to a contract)
-‘crime is crime bc it consists of wrongdoing which directly and in serious degree threatens
the security or well-being of society’ – Allen C. (1931) ‘the nature of crime’ journal of society
of comparative legislation
What is criminal liability?
-person will be considered to have criminal liability if they are put on trial and found guilty
of committing a criminal offence
-conduct may b deemed criminal by statue (act of parliament) or by common law
-if a person is charged with a criminal offence the prosecution will normally be brought by
the crown prosecution service (cps) in the name of the crown
-the court (either magistrates or crown court)’ will decide the guilt of the defendant (the
person being charged)
-the prosecution bears the burden of proof for establishing the guilt of anyone who is
charged with a criminal offence (defendant) if this cannot b done then there can be no
conviction (guilty verdict) – Woolmington v DPP [1935]
-the prosecution must prove the defendants guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’
Actus Reus of a criminal offence
-fundamental principle of English criminal law that a person may not be convicted of a crime
unless they have behaved in an unlawful way
-defendant cannot be convicted of a criminal offence based on their thoughts alone, there
must also b a criminal act/failure to act
-every crim offence has its own actus reus , if it has not been performed then no offence will
have been committed
-in criminal trials the burden of proof will be on the prosecution to prove ‘beyond
reasonable doubt’ that d performed actus reus if this cannot b done, the d will not b
criminally liable for the offence with which they have been charged
3 types of Actus Reus element
-conduct (where d performs a positive act or omission) e.g: perjury contains conduct
element
-consequences (where d causes a result) murder is a ‘result’ crime
-circumstances (where certain circumstances exist which lead to liability) theft:property
must belong to another, rape: absence of consent
e.g: theft (conduct + circumstances), murder ( circumstances, conduct + consequences)
(( State of affairs crimes have no conduct or consequence elements but depend upon the
existence of a set of circumstances ))
, 2
Requirement of voluntariness
-general rule: actus reus elements of an offence must b voluntary in order for criminal
liability to be imposed, where actus reus is involuntarily performed, there is no criminal
liability.
- Kay v Butterworth [1945] 173 LT 191 : “A person… who, through no fault of his own,
becomes unconscious while driving, for example, by being struck by a stone, or by being
taken ill, ought not to be liable at criminal law” (obiter dicta per Humphreys J)
- “[I]n Kay v. Butterworth... the judge, after emphasizing that drowsiness or sleep would be
no excuse, said that ‘he did not mean to say that a person should be made liable at criminal
law who through no fault of his own became unconscious while driving; for example, if he
were struck by a stone or overcome by a sudden illness; or the car was temporarily out of
control by his being attacked by a swarm of bees’” (per Lord Goddard CJ in Hill v Baxter
[1958] 1 QB 277).
- “A blow from a stone or an attack by a swarm of bees I think introduces some conception
akin to novus actus interveniens”. (per Lord Goddard CJ in Hill v Baxter [1958] 1 QB 277).
Circumstances – State of Affairs crimes
-most offences require voluntary conduct on the part of the accused to establish their actus
reus, there are some offences which prohibit the existence of a state of affairs, sometimes
people can find themselves in a prohibited situation without having put themselves in that
state. No mens rea is required for conviction. These offences are quite rare.
-Offences of absolute liability are “state of affairs” crime because they are entirely
dependent upon the existence of surrounding circumstances but require no conduct from the
D.
-Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent [1983], The Times, 28 March – being drunk on a highway
(s.12, Licensing Act 1872)
-Larsonneur [1933] 97 JP 206 – being illegally in the UK (Aliens Order 1920)
Actus Reus of a criminal offence
-general rule in English law is that criminal liability cannot arise from an individuals failure to
act
-actus reus of an offence can only be performed by way of a voluntary positive action, rather
than an omission
-the actus reus doctrine requires an action of some sort: smth done by the defendant
-contrast approach in other countries like france and germany for e.g: if u see someone
drowning and u can save him but u don’t save him, then that is an omission/failure to act
Whether there should be a general duty to rescue: conventional and social responsibility
view
-conventional:
A should not b compelled to save b
A should not b encouraged to interfere in b’s life, the law values individual autonomy and
liberty
Doing a positive criminal act with bad consequences is morally more blameworthy than
omitting to act and causing the same consequences
