Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Actus Reus - Coggle Diagram

- - - - The prosecution has to prove both of these elements so that the magistrates or jury are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt of their existence and the defendant will be criminally liable. The exception to this rule is a small group of offences known as crimes of strict liability.
        
        If this is not done, the person will be acquitted, as in English and Welsh law all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty – Woolmington v DPP (1935).
- - - - Continuing acts
        
        Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1969)
        
        Allowed what seemed to be an omission to be treated as an act
        
        It is not necessary for the mens rea to be present at the inception of the actus reus. It can be superimposed on an existing act provided it was a confusing act
      - Duty of doctors
        
        Airedale National Health Service Trust v Bland (1993):
        
        Found that treatment that is in the patient’s best interests is not considered to be an omission so is therefore not the actus reus.
  - - - However there are some exceptions; a person will be held criminally liable for failing to act where:
        
        There is a duty imposed by their official position
        
        This can be imposed where a person is guilty of misconduct.
        
        Dytham (1979)
        
        They have a contractual duty to act
        
        This may be contained in the person’s contract
        
        Pittwood (1902)
        
        lifeguard has a duty to act to save people’s lives if they are in the swimming pool when he’s on duty.
        
        They have created a dangerous situation
        
        A person who is aware that he has acted in a way that has endangered another’s life or property and does nothing to prevent the relevant harm occurring, may be criminally liable
        
        R v Miller (1982)
        
        There is a duty created by statute
        
        Road Traffic Act 1998 for failure to provide a breath specimen when required.
        
        Children and Young Person’s Act 1988 for failing to send a child to school.
        
        There is a special relationship
        
        This is usually created in a parent-child relationship.
        
        R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918)
        
        They have voluntarily accepted responsibility for another
        
        People may choose to take on responsibility for another.
        
        They will then have a duty to act to protect that person if the person fails into difficulty.
        
        Stone & Dobinson (1977)
- - - - Crimes can be divided into three types, depending on the nature of their actus reus.
        
        Action crimes
        
        A crime has occurred because a state of affairs exists.
        
        For example, in R v Larsonneur the actus reus consisted of being a foreigner who had not been given permission to come to Britain and was then found in the country.
        
        Result crimes
        
        The actus reus of these is distinguished by the fact that the accused’s behaviour must produce a particular result – the most obvious example being murder, where the accused’s act must cause the death of a human being.
        
        State of affairs crimes
        
        The actus reus here is simply an act, the consequences of that act are irrelevant.
        
        For example, perjury is committed whenever someone makes a statement which they do not believe to be true while under oath.
        
        Whether or not that statement makes a difference to the trial is not important to whether the offence of perjury has been committed
    - - The courts gave examples of involuntary acts- reflex action after being hit on the head with a hammer, or being stung by a swarm of bees.