Criminal Model Answers
Mini Topics
Actus Reus and Mens Rea
For the defendant to be guilty of an offence, the prosecution has to prove the
defendant had the two essential components for the crime: the actus reus and mens
rea. The actus reus is the ‘guilty act’ and usually requires a positive, voluntary act.
The mens rea is the ‘guilty mind’ and is often more difficult to prove. There are two
types: intention and recklessness. There are two types of intention: direct (R v
Mohan) and oblique (R v Woolin). A direct intent is where the defendant has a desire
to bring about the prohibited consequence. An oblique intent is not a direct intent, but
a virtually certain consequence of their action and they appreciate it.
Recklessness is where the defendant does not mean to cause the outcome but is so
careless, they take the risk, and they know they are taking it. It is a subjective test (R
v Cunningham).
Causation
In summary, your actions caused the outcome. If it can be shown that you caused
the outcome, you will be legally responsible for it. There are two primary tests:
factual (R v White; R v Padgett) and legal causation (R v Kimsey). The factual tests
asks but for the defendants actions the prohibited would not have occurred (the ‘but
for’ test). The legal tests ask was the defendants actions more than minimal, but not
necessarily a substantial cause, but operate and flows from the wound. If this can be
shown, you will be guilty.
There are 3 intervening acts, if one of these are proved then this will break the chain
of causation and exclude anything that occurred prior to this act. These are: an act of
a 3rd party (usually doctors, R v Smith; R v Jordan; R v Cheshire), the victims own
act (R v Roberts) or a natural but unpredictable event.
There is also the Thin-Skull Rule (R v Blaue), when the defendant must take the
victim as they found them. For example, if a person has a weak build, and you push
them to the ground, and they die. You cannot plead that it isn’t your fault because
another person with a stronger build would not have died.
Strict Liability
These are offences that do not require any mens rea, when you commit the actus
reus, you will be liable. Strict liability offences are usually minor, regulatory offences
(Callow v Tillstone). Strict liability offences are stated in statute, if not we presume
, mens rea. The aim of these offences is to protect the public and to promote a higher
standard of care.
In the case of Sweet v Parsley, the courts decided the offence was too serious as it
would have affected the reputation of the defendant too much, therefore it was ruled
it was not a strict liability offence.
Examples are speeding, food hygiene and selling alcohol to underaged individuals.
Omissions
An omission is committed when the defendant fails to act when a duty of care is
owed. There are 5 types of omission. A contractual duty (R v Pitwood), a duty
through voluntary assumption (R v Stone and Dobinson), a duty through a
relationship (R v Gibbins and Proctor), a duty through one’s official position (R v
Dytham) and a duty which arises because the defendant set a chain of events (R v
Miller).
Coincidence
An offence may be committed when the actus reus and the mens rea occur at
different times. This is to reduce instances of injustice and protect the public. There
are 2 rules of this. The continuing act (Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner).
This is when the actus reus happens first, and the mens rea is formed afterwards.
The series of events rule (Thabo Meli; R v Church) is when the mens rea occurs first,
and then the actus reus is formed afterwards.
Transferred Malice
This is a rule regarding the mens rea. It is when the defendant intends to do one
thing (A), but something else happens (B). There are 2 parts to this rule. When the
defendant intends to harm one person, but it happens to another, they are the
unintended victim (R v Griango). When the defendant harms one person, and it
results in others getting harmed, they are the additional victims (R v Mitchell; R v
Latimer). When this rule is applied, the malice (intent) from the original victim
transfers to the other victims too, resulting in the defendant being guilty of the
offences caused to the victims involved. However, this rule can only be applied to
offences of a similar type.
Fatal Offences
Fatal offences are primarily homicide. It is the ending the life of another person.
During the exam, when someone has died, the offence you need to talk about will
either be murder, involuntary manslaughter or voluntary manslaughter.
