criminal law cases

• Actus reus


  The physical act or conduct that is prohibited by criminal law
• Omissions


  • Statutory duty
  • Contractual duty
  • Duty through official position
  • Duty through relationship
  • Voluntarily undertaken duty
  • Duty from chain of events set
• Factual causation


  Whether the defendant's act was the cause in fact of the result
• Factual causation


  • White (1910)
  • Pagett (1983)
• Legal causation


  Whether the defendant's act was the legal cause of the result
• Legal causation


  • Kimsey (1996)
  • Blaue (1975)
• Intervening acts


  • Third party (usually medical)
  • V's own act
• Intervening acts - Third party

  • Smith (1959)
  • Cheshire (1991)
  • Jordan (1956)
  • Malcherek (1981)
• Intervening acts - V's own act

  • Roberts (1971)
  • Marjoram (2000)
  • Williams (1992)
  • Dear (1996)
• Mens rea


  The mental element required for criminal liability
• Intention


  The defendant's purpose or desire to bring about a particular consequence
• Recklessness


  The defendant's awareness of the risk of a particular consequence occurring
• Recklessness


  • Cunningham (1957)
  • Caldwell (1981)
  • G and another (2003)
• Negligence


  The defendant's failure to take reasonable care to avoid a risk of harm
• Negligence


  • Adomako
• Knowledge


  The defendant's awareness of the circumstances that make their conduct criminal
• Knowledge


  • Sweet v Parsley (1969)
• Transferred malice


  The defendant's intention to commit one offence is transferred to a different offence that was committed
• Transferred malice


  • Latimer (1886)
  • Pembliton (1874)
• Coincidence of actus reus and mens rea

  The defendant's mental state and physical act must coincide for criminal liability
• Coincidence of actus reus and mens rea

  • Thabo Meli (1954)
  • Church (1965)
• Continuing act


  The defendant's criminal act continues over a period of time
• Continuing act


  • Fagan (1986)
• Strict liability


  Criminal liability without the need to prove mens rea
• Strict liability


  • Storkwain (1986)
  • Prince (1875)
  • Hibbert (1869)
  • Callow and Tillstone (1990)
  • Shah and Shah (1999)
  • Cundy v Le Cocq (1884)
  • Sherraz v De Rutzen (1895)
  • Lemon v Gay News (1997)
  • Gammon v Attorney General of Hong Kong (1984)
  • Alphacell (1972)
  • B v DPP (2000)
  • Blake (1997)
  • R v G (2008)
• Absolute liability


  Criminal liability without any requirement of mens rea
• Absolute liability


  • Larsonneur (1933)
  • Winzar (1983)
• Homicide


  The unlawful killing of a human being
• Homicide


  • Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 1994) (1997)
• Under 13' pleaded guilty as was advised it was strict liability. Was taken to HoL for breach of human rights
• 6(1)'fair procedure'- they said not concerned with content of law and 6(2)'presumed innocent'- they said didn't say what mental or other elements should be
• Absolute liability cases


  • Larssoneur (1933)
  • Winzar (1983)
• Larssoneur (1933) - D was illegal alien ordered to leave uk, fled to eire irish police deported her to uk police custody, she didn't want to return to the uk and her act wasn't voluntary but still she was found guilty of aliens order 1920 for being found in the uk
• Winzar (1983) - D taken to hospital but found he was drunk not ill so told him to leave, he didn't and police were called, they came then bought him to the roadway, then decided he was drunk and charged him with being drunk on the highway, divisional court upheld conviction
• Attorney general's reference (no3 of 1994) (1997) - D stabbed 23 week pregnant girlfriend, she recovered but had to give birth early, baby was born alive but died at 4 months from premature birth, D was charged with murder but trial judge said when crime occurred baby wasn't 'reasonable creature in being' so acquitted him, HoL said when baby has been born then dies person can be liable only not creature in being if unborn, so he was charged with manslaughter (no mens rea for murder)
• Vickers - Broke into death old lady sweetshop cellar- she saw him so he attacked her punching her lots and kicked her in the head, she died from injuries, CoA upheld conviction for murder where D intends GBH malice aforethought can be implied
• Cunningham (1981) - D attacked V in pub with chair V died and D was charged with murder, D tried to appeal but HoL said no GBH is enough for mens rea of murder
• Maloney (1985) - D shot and killed stepdad in drunken 'draw the gun' challenge- held foresight of consequences is only evidence that intention may be inferred from
• Wollin (1998) - jury not entitled to find necessary intention unless they feel sure death or serious injury was a virtual certainty from D's actions and D appreciated this
• Byrne(1960) - D was sexual psychopath, strangled and mutilated young woman. Medical evidence showed his condition meant he couldn't control his perverted desires. CoA quashed conviction of murder for manslaughter as condition came within diminished responsibility