• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Criminal Law

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Criminal Law 1. Vincent, an Afro-Caribbean, was walking home when Kevin, a member of an extreme right-wing group, started shouting racist abuse. Kevin then attacked Vincent and pulled out a knife. Vincent suffered several deep cuts to his face and part of his ear was severed. a. Explain the terms actus reus and mens rea. Using those explanations, outline an appropriate offence with which Kevin might be charged. (15 marks) Actus reus means the guilty act, this is the physical element of a crime, this includes an act, failure to act [an omission]. An omission is when the defendant is under a legal duty to act in a certain way, this may include, a contractual/vocational duty [R v Pittwood], a relationship [R v Stone and Dobinson] or when the defendant creates a situation whereby a duty is imposed [R v Miller]. ...read more.

Middle

Direct intention is what the defendant desired whereas oblique intention is when the defendant foresees will almost certainly happen [R v Woolin]. Recklessness, this is the taking of an unjustifiable risk, it is judged by the Subjective test i.e. the defendant should have realised the risk [R. v Cunningham] this is also known as Cunningham recklessness as it was the first case. In certain crimes e.g. murder, s.18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and theft it is necessary to show intention. In many cases recklessness will be adequate as the mens rea. In very rare cases negligence may suffice as the mens rea element, negligence is a tort e.g. killing by gross negligence. The general principle in criminal law is that both the actus reus and the mens rea have to coincide. ...read more.

Conclusion

Another argument for strict liability is that it encourages higher standards in such matters as hygiene in processing and selling food. It makes sure that businesses are run properly. One of the main arguments against strict liability is that it makes people who are not blameworthy guilty. Even those people who have taken all possible care will be found guilty and punished. This is what had happened in the case of Harrow London Borough Council v Shah [1999], they had been found guilty even though they had done their best to prevent sales of lottery tickets to anyone under the age of 16. Other arguments are it is contrary to the principle of human rights and that there is no evidence that it improves standards. ?? ?? ?? ?? Habib Mohammed AS Law Stephen Ings ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Criminal Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Criminal Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    English law does not normally impose liability for an omission or failure to act ...

    4 star(s)

    One of these is that the law can be expanded to involve more duty situations.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Critical evaluation of murder for A2 law unit 4

    3 star(s)

    who got up, armed himself with a shot gun, and without warning fired three shots in to the dark. One of the shots killed a burgular. Convicted of murder. He appeal on the grounds of self defence, but it was rejected as the force was not reasonable.

  1. Human rights in Britain

    mobile-home owners who did not belong to the travelers population and their Article 14 (protection from discrimination) and Article 8 (right to respect for the home) had been violated. Conclusion In conclusion before the Human Rights Act civil liberties were not set out in an effective way, the UK Courts

  2. Criminal offences are usually defined in terms of a guilty act (actus reus) and ...

    However if after the act of the defendant something else occurred which is regarded as being the true cause of the harm, it is said that the chain of causation has been broken. To show actus Reus it is necessary to show that: * The defendants conduct was the factual cause of the harm.

  1. List and explain the six most important cases for the law on insanity, explaining ...

    The trial judge amounted this amounted to a plea of insanity, at which point she pleaded guilty. From the definition given by the dictionary, it would appear that the defendant in this case suffered from a defect of reason, since she had no motive for taking the mincemeat, as she didn?t want it.

  2. Explain the meaning of Actus reus and mens rea

    The actus reus and mens rea must coincide. There are various types of mens rea. The most blameworthy is intention of which there are two types: direct and indirect (oblique). Direct intent is where the defendant wants the outcome and indirect intent, as defined by Lord Steyn in R v

  1. Explain what is meant by the term 'causation' in criminal law and assess how ...

    When looking at causation, the Thin Skull Rule should also be considered. This rule states that ?you must take your victim as you find them?. For example, if you strike someone in the face, only intending to hurt them, but instead they die due to a physical condition or abnormality they have, you are still responsible for their death.

  2. Explain what is meant by the term causation in criminal law and assess how ...

    Pagett was convicted of her manslaughter she would not have died ?but for? his actions. If the consequence would have occurred anyway there is no liability this happened in White where the defendant put cyanide ion his mothers drink intending to kill her she died of a heart attack before drinking it.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work