Section 4: Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person (OAPA)
The Offences, Questions on Morality, Autonomy, Consent and Public Interest
Section 5: Inchoate Liability & Complicity
Attempt & Assistance/Encouragement (Parties to a Crime)
*Merged Seminar*
Section 6: Sexual Offences
Rape (max life), Assault by Penetration (max life) & Sexual Assault (max 10 years)
*Merged Seminar*
Section 7: Property Offences
Theft, Criminal Damage, Arson, Attempted Criminal Damage/Arson, Burglary, Aggravated
Burglary & Burglary of a Dwelling
Section 8: Defences
Self Defence
Section 9: Intoxication
Does D have the requisite mens rea for the defence?
*No Seminar*
Section 10: Revision Lecture/Recap
1
, Section 2: Actus Reus & Mens Rea
Foundational Knowledge
LI- October 16th, 2018
Actus Reus
● Guilty act
● Includes defendant’s act and failures to act (omissions)
Categories of Offences
● Conduct crimes
○ Don’t include a result element
○ E.g Include perjury and general inchoate offences
○ Actus reus – complete as soon as the defendant performs certain conduct in
certain prescribed circumstances
○ Causation rules not relevant
■ Defendant’s conduct doesn’t need to cause anything to satisfy the
requirements of the offence
● Result crimes
○ Requires a result element
○ E.g Include murder and criminal damage
○ Actus reus – defendant performs conduct in prescribed circumstances with that
conduct causing the prescribed result
○ Rules of causation apply
■ Where the defendant wounds the victim by cutting her with a knife for
example
● No room for discussion because the wounding and cutting happened
simultaneously
■ Where the defendant attacks the victim and the victim dies some time
later
● The gap between the conduct and result means that a more
extended discussion of causation is required
Actus Reus: Status Offences
● Crime is committed when a certain state of affairs exists → defendant is in a certain
condition or in a particular status
○ E.g Terrorism Act 2000 → being a member of a proscribed organization
○ S. 5 (2) Road Traffic Act 1972 → being in charge of a motor vehicle while
unfit to drive through drink or drugs
● Possession offences
○ Numerous offences if you are in possession of dangerous material like weapons
● Strict liability crimes
2
, ○ Requires no proof of mens rea in relation to one or more aspects of the actus reus
○ Often connected to health and safety regulations
○ E.g Speeding, driving without insurance, etc
Actus Reus Elements
● (1) Conduct
○ Defendant’s physical acts or omissions required for liability
○ Several statutes refer to conduct using the term “act”
○ E.g Possession of drugs
● (2) Circumstances
○ Facts surrounding the defendant’s conduct required for liability
● (3) Results
○ The effects of the defendant’s conduct required for liability
○ Causation is an essential element of any offence that includes a result element
○ E.g Murder needs proof that the defendants act caused the death of the victim
● Not all offences involve all three of these elements
○ E.g Bigamy → no need to prove the act caused a particular result
Omissions
● Normally people will not be guilty of a crime because they omitted to act
○ However, they can be guilty for an omission if they were under a duty to act
● No general duty to act positively for the benefit of someone else
Lord Diplock- R v Miller [1983]
“The conduct of the parabolical priest and Levite on the road to Jericho may have been indeed
deplorable, but English law has not so far developed to the stage of treating it as criminal”
● Positive duties interferes with our liberty to act as we wish
● Logic of result crimes = defendant caused prohibited result
● Policy reasons
● E.g France → You have a general duty to act
● There are exceptions that may give rise to a duty to act:
○ (1) Special relationships
○ (2) Assumption of responsibility
○ (3) Responsibility under contract
○ (4) Responsibility under statute
○ (5) Where the defendant creates a dangerous situation
Lord Denning
“Where the defendant is not acting voluntarily he or she is said to be acting as an automan and will
not be guilty of an offence because both the mens rea and actus rea will not be proved”
Omission’s Liability
● To satisfy the conduct element of an offence, where omissions liability is at issue, all three
must be found:
○ (1) Defendant’s offence must be capable of commission by omission
3
, ○ (2) Defendant must have a legally recognized duty to act
○ (3) Defendant must have unreasonably failed to act on that duty
● As long as the other elements of the offence are also satisfied, the defendant will be liable for
the offence
Special Relationships
● Example of a doctor and patient is a special relationship
R v Evans [2009]
● Appellant was convicted of gross negligence manslaughter alongside their mother
● Sister overdosed on heroin and neither of them sought medical assistance for the fear of
getting into trouble
● Where the existence of the duty is not in dispute, the judge may well direct the jury that a duty
of care exists
● Courts held that there was a duty of care to take action to reduce the medical risks
→ familial relationship
Lord CJ
“In some cases, such as those arising from a doctor/patient relationship where the existence of the
duty is not in dispute, the judge may well direct the jury that a duty of care exists”
R v Downes [1875]
● Parent didn’t call doctor
● Was part of a group that believed that medical aid to treat illness was sinful
● Defendant failed to call the doctor and relied on the power of prayer
● Courts held there was a duty to act where there’s a close family relationship →
convicted of manslaughter
R v Gibbins and Proctor [1918]
● Parental responsibility to feed their child
● Defendant was found guilty of murder where they failed to feed their 7 year old child and they
died of starvation
● Parent’s duty towards the young child is self-evident
R v Smith [1979]
● Husband for unwell wife
● Refused to seek medical attention for their newborn child, who later died after becoming
unconscious
● Case collapsed for the failure of the jury to decide but the trial judge agreed that the
defendant had a duty to care for his wife and their child
Assumption of Responsibility
R v Instan [1893]
● Defendant lived with her aunt who was mostly healthy until shortly before her death
● During the last couple of days, she was incapacitated and was immobile
● The defendant made no effort to obtain treatment or care for her aunt, who later passed away
● Was convicted of manslaughter
4
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller SharingExcellence. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £14.69. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
