Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea - Smith 1975
An act does not make a man guilty of a crime unless his mind also be guilty
2 of 22
3 requirements for criminal liability
Actus reus, mens rea and no defence
3 of 22
3 Different classifications of offences
Summary only offences (least serious), either way offences, indictable only offences (most serious)
4 of 22
Where are criminal hearings?
They start in the magistrates court with judges and depending on the severity may end up in the Crown Court before jury
5 of 22
Mode of Trial Procedure
Plea before Venue (guilty or not guilty), prosecution and defnce agree where to hear case, magistrates accept jurisdiction or not to hear the case, D chooses which court if magistrates accept it, otherwise trial at crown court
6 of 22
Who brings criminal cases to court?
Brought to the crown prosecution services (CPS) by State (the queen, R) NOT THE VICTIM
7 of 22
Criminal Justice Proccess
Investigation, Arrest and charge, First court appearance, Plea (If NG, trial), verdict, if G plea, sentencing
8 of 22
Burden of Proof falls on who?
Golden thread principle- Prosecution have to prove the defendant committed the crime, each element of the offence
9 of 22
Defendant proved in law to be sane
Up to defendant to prove defence of insanity, diminished responsibility etc.
10 of 22
Standard of proof in a criminal trial
Beyond reasonable doubt. A higher standard because freedom is at stake
11 of 22
Three types of actus reus
Conduct (positive act and omission to act, consequences, circumstances
12 of 22
Absolute libility crimes
Dont need a mens rea
13 of 22
Ommissions
No criminal liability for failure to act in general, but in France and Germany this is not the case. Exception are; Special relationships, voluntary assumption of responsibility, defendant caused danger, contractual duty, statutory duty
14 of 22
Examples of mens rea
intention, recklessness, belief, dishonesty
15 of 22
Difference between subjective and objective approaches?
Subjective- D's state of mind, Objective- compare D to a reasonable person
16 of 22
Motive and Intent
two separate things, if a good motive can be used to reduce sentence
17 of 22
Recklessness- R v G and another 2003
Subjective test. Was D aware of the risk occurring? Objective- Was the risk unreasonable?
18 of 22
Principle of coincidence
the mens rea must be present at the time of actus reus
19 of 22
Fagon 1968-continuing act
defendant did not have the mens rea at the time of actus reus so was not reckless.
20 of 22
Principle of Coincidence
actus reus and mens rea should coincide (occur at the same time)
21 of 22
Transferred Malice
If the offence is the same the actus reus from one offence may be transferred to another crime (only once, not twice)
22 of 22
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
An act does not make a man guilty of a crime unless his mind also be guilty
Back
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea - Smith 1975
Card 3
Front
Actus reus, mens rea and no defence
Back
Card 4
Front
Summary only offences (least serious), either way offences, indictable only offences (most serious)
Back
Card 5
Front
They start in the magistrates court with judges and depending on the severity may end up in the Crown Court before jury
Comments
No comments have yet been made