Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Cases - Actus Reus (S.5 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004: (A…
Cases - Actus Reus
S.5 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004:
A statute can give rise to a duty to act. Anyone living in the same household as a child or vulnerable adult who is at significant risk of serious physical harm has a duty to take reasonable steps to protect them from this risk e.g. to alert the police/social services etc.
-
-
R v Pittwood
-
Pittwood was responsible for manslaughter by omission because he shut the gates, with the result that a person crossing the line was struck by a train.
R v Gibbins & Proctor
Gibbins was responsible for murder by omission because he deliberately starved a seven-year-old girl he to death that he had duty to feed and protect as he was her parent.
A duty to act can come from a special relationship between the D and the V e.g. that of a parent to a child, this can give rise to a duty to act.
R v Stone & Dobinson
-
Stone and Dobinson were responsible for manslaughter by omission because they had a duty of care as Stone was Fanny’s brother and Dobinson had undertaken some care for her therefore owed a duty of care and her dying of malnutrition was a breach of their duty.
R v Townsend
A duty to act can come from a special relationship between the D and the V e.g. that of a parent to a child, this can give rise to a duty to act.
Townsend was responsible for manslaughter by omission because she had a special relationship with her daughter and knew she had overdosed on drugs but was watching Emmerdale farm.
R v Dytham
-
Dytham was responsible for misconduct in a public office because he let a man get kicked to death which is neglecting to perform his duty.
R v Miller
Miller was responsible for criminal damage (arson) because he did not take reasonable steps to deal with the fire when he discovered his mattress was on fire.
A duty to act can arise when the D creates a dangerous situation and, being aware of this fact, he fails to do anything about it.
R v Evans
Evans was responsible for manslaughter by omission because she supplied her half-sister with heroin an self-injected and didn’t try to get medical help when she had a duty of care for her half-sister.
A duty to act can arise when the D creates a dangerous situation and, being aware of this fact, he fails to do anything about it.
R v White (1910)
In White the defendant put cyanide in his mothers drink and she died of a heart attack so he was not the factual cause of murder but was charged with attempted murder.
Factual causation - would the consequence have occurred ‘but for’ the D’s conduct? If would have happened anyway, D will not be the factual cause of it.
R v Kimsey
In Kimsey the defendant was involved in a high-speed car chase and lost control of her car causing the other driver to die in the crash. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction for causing death by dangerous driving.
Even if D isn’t the sole or main cause he can still be the factual cause if he makes more than a ‘slight or trifling’ contribution.
R v Roberts
The V can break the chain but only if their conduct is regarded as ‘daft or unexpected’ in that situation.
In Roberts a girl jumped out of a car at 20-40 mph in order to escape from Roberts’ sexual advances. The girl was injured by jumping from it. The defendant was liable for her injuries.