Actus reus is the guilty act for murder this would be causing death, if there is no actus reus there is no crime.
1 of 9
Case for Actus Reuse
R v White 1910 defendant intended to kill his mother by poison but she died because of heart attack therefore he was not guilty of her murder as he did not cause her death.
2 of 9
The thin skull rule
this is when if more serious injury occur then intended because of the victims conditions the defendant is still responsible for causing all actions.
3 of 9
Case for thin skull rule
R v Blaue 1975 a man stabbed a teenage girl but she refused to take blood transfusion because of religious matters, she died and the defendant was responsible for her death
4 of 9
Mens rea
is the guilty mind which is the intent to do something, this could also be recklessness
5 of 9
Transferred malice
is when you intent to hit someone but you hit the actual victim
6 of 9
case for transferred malice
R v Latimer 1886 a man struck a belt to hit someone but hit the actual victim therefore his actions were transferred to actual victim
7 of 9
Strict Liability
is for crimes that do not require mens rea such as motoring offences as it is hard to prove.
8 of 9
Case for strict liabilty
PSGB v Storkwain 1986 pharmacist dispensed medicine without valid prescription and therefore charged with strict liability.
9 of 9
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Case for Actus Reuse
Back
R v White 1910 defendant intended to kill his mother by poison but she died because of heart attack therefore he was not guilty of her murder as he did not cause her death.
Comments
No comments have yet been made