Criminal Law (LL108) - Actus Reus and Mens Rea
Contents
1. Actus Reus
1.1. Debate: Should causation be independent of legal (and moral) responsibility?
1.2. Yes - Causation should be independent of legal (and moral) responsibility
1.3. No - Causation is and should be linked to morality
2. Drugs cases and causation
2.1. Strand 1 of case law
2.2. Strand 2 of case law
3. Omissions liability
3.1. Definition
3.2. The two types of omission liability in the common law
3.2.1. Relational
3.2.2. Situational
---------------------------------------------------------------
1. Mens Rea
1.1. Intention in Principle
1.1.1. Direct versus Oblique Intention
1.2. Intention in the Courts
2. Recklessness
2.1. Original: Cunningham recklessness
2.2. Change: Caldwell
2.3. Reversion to Original: R v G & R
3. Negligence
3.1. Negligence criteria
3.2. Is negligence an effective deterrent?
4. How should the law deal with cases where D achieved something different to what he intended?
4.1. Unforeseen mode
4.2. Mistaken object
4.3. Transferred fault/malice
Contents
1. Actus Reus
1.1. Debate: Should causation be independent of legal (and moral) responsibility?
1.2. Yes - Causation should be independent of legal (and moral) responsibility
1.3. No - Causation is and should be linked to morality
2. Drugs cases and causation
2.1. Strand 1 of case law
2.2. Strand 2 of case law
3. Omissions liability
3.1. Definition
3.2. The two types of omission liability in the common law
3.2.1. Relational
3.2.2. Situational
---------------------------------------------------------------
1. Mens Rea
1.1. Intention in Principle
1.1.1. Direct versus Oblique Intention
1.2. Intention in the Courts
2. Recklessness
2.1. Original: Cunningham recklessness
2.2. Change: Caldwell
2.3. Reversion to Original: R v G & R
3. Negligence
3.1. Negligence criteria
3.2. Is negligence an effective deterrent?
4. How should the law deal with cases where D achieved something different to what he intended?
4.1. Unforeseen mode
4.2. Mistaken object
4.3. Transferred fault/malice
