Samenvatting
Summary CriminalLaw
This helped us through the exam, we passed with grades like 8s and 7s so you know. It has every detail of the course discription in it, and even extra information from the book (yes we read it).
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 40 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 40 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Criminal Law week 2 SummaryThe conduct element - Actus Reus (“AR”): Acts, Omissions, Causation and the mental
element - Mens Rea (“MR”): Intent, Negligence, Recklessness
Actus Reus and Mens Rea:
Actus Reus and Mens Rea (AR and MR) required to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt to obtain
a conviction.
Man is not liable for his acts alone, only if he acts with a guilty mind.
All crimes will have an AR component. Refers to the conduct prohibited by the offence in question
and sometimes circumstance. Many crimes require the prohibited conduct to have occurred in legal
relevant circumstances. Also, refers to all those external elements of an offensive which are not
concerned with the internal element.
AR
- External elements of the offence
- Guilty conduct
- Acts, Omissions, Causation
Some defences will specify the type of conduct required by the AR.
The AR must be voluntary or willed this is a fundamental requirement of Criminal Liability. This
implies for the respect of individual freedom, responsibility and protection from harm. Voluntary
actions are described as muscular or bodily movement controlled by the will of volition. This
distinguishes the facts of doing something and having something done to you. So, movements done
undesired, unconscious or physically controlled by another are involuntary.
One of the elements of criminal responsibility – the wrongful act or omission that comprises the
physical components.
All crimes have an AR
Types:
The conduct
the result
State of affairs
Omission
Conduct: The conduct itself constitutes the AR.
(Rape, Perjury, Theft, Possession of drugs)
Result:
AR may relate to the result of the act or omission of the defendant, The conduct itself may not be
criminal, but the result of the conduct may be.
Throwing a stone isn’t a crime but when it hits someone it is a crime. SO, when you do something
that can have a result of a crime you still commited a crime.
NOTE- Causation must be established in all result crimes i.e. it must be proved that the result was
caused by the act or omission of ‘D’.
- Assault, is one of the examples where a result of a conduct is a crime, when you threaten someone,
the intent to frighten you.
- Battery, when you threaten someone but it doesn’t stop with threatening.
,- ABH (causing actual bodily harm)
- Wounding and GBH (causing grievious bodily harm)
- Murder + Manslaughter
- Criminal damage
State of affairs
Here the AR consists of being rather then doing
Omissions:
General rule regarding omissions (EXAM)
There is no liability for a failure to act.
There are some exceptions.
In a limited number of cases, an omission can amount to the AR of a crime.
(When you see someone drowning and you don’t do anything to save the child you will not incur
criminal liability for your inaction, .. )
Stel er is een brand, en er komen brandweermannen en jij loopt er ook, als jij het person niet helpt in
danger you are not under criminal liability, maar die brandweerman wel als hij alleen loopt en niks
doet.
One is employed and has a duty to act.
Statutory duty: in some situations there is a statutory duty to act,
Contractual duty: if a person owes a contractual duty to act, then a failure meets this contractual
duty may result in criminal liability.
Duty imposed by law, AR can be committed by an omission where there exists a duty imposed by
law.
There are three situations in which a duty may be imposed by law:
- D creates a dangerous situation
- Has been a voluntary assumption of responsibility
- Misconduct in a public office
Under English law there is no general duty to act.
Sometimes there is a close or special relationship giving rise to a duty to act, the law has developed
on a case to case basis (parents child).
MR
- Internal elements of the offence
- Fault or mental element
- Intent, Negligence, Recklessness
Having the intent, for example:
- With intent to kill or with intent to cause serious bodily harm
Intending to do something or causing something. Two possible definitions:
- A person should be taken to intend a result if he or she acts in order to bring it about
- An intention to bring about a result may be found if it is shown that the defendant thought that the
result was a virtually certain consequence of his action
Reckless
,A person can act recklessly in two ways:
A person can act recklessly with respect to
- a circumstance
- a result (aware of a risk that a particular result will occur)
1. Was the defendant aware of the risk? (Subjective)
2. Whether the risk taken was reasonable in the circumstances of which the defendant was aware
(objective)
3. His awareness?
Someone is reckless if he or she takes unjustified risks.
Reckless is part of the MR. Recklessness is the necessary MR for many offences
(depending upon your national jurisdiction / criminal law): In England and Wales:
- Criminal damage
- Arson
- Assault
- Wounding
Different ways of being Reckless:
- Circumstance: A person can act recklessly with respect to a circumstance: when he is a aware of
risk, and aware that the particular problem will exist
- Result: I know that my car is leaking petrol, so I should be cautious-> objective (I, I , I, You are
responsible for it)
Recklessness features as the MR element in a wide range of offences.
- In some, it relates to the circumstances (e.g. creating a dangerous situation)
- In others, to the consequences (whether damage or injury will result).
It is a subjective form of MR, focused on the defendant’s own perceptions of the existence of the
risk. However, whether it is reasonable for D to run the risk is a question for the jury dependent on
all the facts.
Draft Criminal Cose 1989
- A person acts recklessly....with respect to -
(i) a circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it exists or will exist;
(ii) a result when he is aware of a risk that it will occur; and it is, in the circumstances known to him,
unreasonable to take that risk".
Intention
Indirect intent; you don’t have the intention, but you still cause something where you know that you
would cause harm
For example, you go to a field with bombs and you want to test if they work, but you also know that
there are many people on that field, the bomb exploded many people die, this guy did not have the
intention, but he knew that he would kill many people if the bombs work.
Ordinary meaning: In ordinary language, the concept of Intention is linked to immediate voluntary
actions that we mean, want of desire to do.
Example:
“I intend to finish my criminal law coursework tonight.” Usually, desired actions will imply a desired
, result. We may also intend a result even though the chances of achieving it are remote.
Both immediate action (to campaign) and the aim/result (getting a second referendum) are desired
and intended, even if the chance of success may not be very high!
Legal meaning:
Type 1 – Direct intent, desire, aim or purpose:
A directly intended result is one which it is the aim or purpose of D to achieve. It will usually be
desired.
Type 2 – Oblique or indirect intent: foresight of a virtual certainty
Indirect or oblique intent is wider than direct intent. Where the result must be a virtually certain
consequence of the achievement of D’s primary purpose (objective test)
AND
D must foresee (appreciate) that fact (subjective test).
Direct intent = Aim / Purpose
Oblique intent = Foresight of a virtual
certainty
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OBLIQUE INTENTION AND RECKLESSNESS
Both types of MR must be assessed subjectively according to what D actually thought was going to
happen at the time of the offence.
Difference is that: Oblique intention requires D to foresee a virtually certain result (e.g. of death) and
Recklessness requires foresight of lower degrees of risk, ranging from high to low probabilities but
not certainties
Oblique / recklessness
I got the button i know it is going to blow up people can die.
Difference is with oblique it is required to be virtually certain that it is going to happen.
Recklessness requires foresight but not certainty.
Negligence, Objective (Doesn’t matter what I think)
It can be argued that negligence is not a state of mind since it is merely a failure to comply with the
standards of the reasonable man.
- Nevertheless, it is the fault element (MR) required for some offences.
E.g. in England and Wales - RTA 1988 section 3 – driving without due care and attention.
Gross negligence can be the basis for liability for manslaughter.
If you take the risk, you should think about the harming
Negligence less serious than recklessness.
Negligence: failing to take all reasonable steps
This distinguishes between actus reus and mens rea (internal side), between conduct element and
the mental element. You have to be sure that there was a conduct element along with the mental
element to do that conduct.
Voluntariness
AR - Voluntary acts
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Eylemt. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 79064 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen