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

Criminal offences are usually defined in terms of a guilty act (actus reus) and a guilty mind(mens rea). Explain, using examples, how the law deals with (i) criminal omissions; (ii) strict liability.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

(a) Criminal offences are usually defined in terms of a guilty act (actus reus) and a guilty mind(mens rea). Explain, using examples, how the law deals with (i) criminal omissions; (ii) strict liability. (15 marks) To be guilty of a criminal offence you must be is possession of both actus reus and mens rea. In some cases however a person may be liable to failing to act this is known as an omission. Some Acts of Parliament create an offence of omission. For example failing to report a road traffic accident. For common law crimes an omission will only be liable for actus reus if they are under a duty to act. These duties include: * Relationship- e.g. parent/child relationship. Where parents have a duty to care for their child. R v Gibbons and Proctor 1918 where a father and his common law wife were guilty of murder when they starved their child to death. * Contract - if the person is under a contractual obligation. E.g. R v Pittwood 1902. * A duty arising from the accused's conduct- for example in R v Miller 1983 Miller accidentally started a fire in a squat but did nothing to stop the fire from spreading. * A duty arising form an official position- for example Police officers and some other are under a duty to protect the public. ...read more.

Middle

ii.)To be guilty of criminal offence this requires both of actus Reus and mens rea. However in some offences only actus Reus is required, these are known as strict liability offences. Illegal parking is an example of a strict liability offence. It can be that a person who parks on double yellow lines did not realise they have done so and so did not possess the mens rea. Recklessness does not need to be shown to convict someone of a strict liability offence. Other examples include trading standards, food safety and the sale of tobacco or lottery tickets to under age children. Statues do not always specify whether or not mens rea is required for a particular offence. However there are two general questions 'do the words used in the Act imply strict liability?' and 'is the offence really criminal or merely regulatory?' Do the words used in the Act imply strict liability? In the case of Gammon ltd v Attorney general of Hong Kong 1985 it was stated that even if an offence did not specify strict liability the words used might nether less indicate this. Criminal or regulatory it is well established that the courts should start from the presumption that all criminal offences require mens rea. However Lord Scarman stated that a distinction should be made between offences that are 'truly criminal;' and those that are concerned with an issue of 'social concern.' ...read more.

Conclusion

In some cases however it can be difficult to accept that the defendants' mens rea was anything other than intention. An example is Moloney 1985. A solider was having a competition with his father to load a shot gun. Moloney won and his father said go on then shoot it and he shot it at him, instantly killing him. Moloney then said. 'I never conceived that what I was doing might cause injury to anybody. It was just a lark.' However some may say that instinctively he must have known that that would happen to his father.' Willow Mentos AS Law Andrew Proctor Word Count: 1, 436 Reg believed that Jack had given a statement about him to the police. He was furious about this and went to Jack's house. Jack was asleep in a chair in the garden. Reg went up to Jack, knocked him unconscious with a cosh and then cut out his tongue. (a) Criminal offences are usually defined in terms of a guilty act (actus reus) and a guilty mind(mens rea). Explain, using examples, how the law deals with (i) criminal omissions; (ii) strict liability. (15 marks) (b) Taking into account both actus reus and mens rea, discuss Reg's criminal liability for the attack on Jack. (10 marks) Please include an essay plan at the start of your answer, as these can be used to give you marks in an exam if you don't manage to finish your answer. It's just good practice, people! ...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)

    a professional duty to act so his level of duty should be greater than Pitwood. Another reason this can be seen as not satisfactory is that they are just doing there jobs and if their duty puts them selves at risk it should not be seen as necessary for them

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Law should encourage citizens in their civic duty to do 'the right thing' in ...

    3 star(s)

    step-brothers and step-sisters and did not feed her so that she starved to death. The court ruled that not only did Gibbons and Proctor have legal responsibility to care for the young girl but their deliberate negligence and inhumane conduct of which caused the girl's death resulted in them being guilty of manslaughter.

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Critical evaluation of murder for A2 law unit 4

    3 star(s)

    However, if self defences sentences were made more lenient, more murder cases may use it is as a defence if they think there actions may result in a lot lower sentence. It may then be overused, and more people who obviously are murders may get off more lightly than they really should.

  2. Free essay

    Jury and Magistrate Exam Questions

    The concept of a perverse verdict is one that pervades the Criminal Justice System of nearly all common law jurisdictions. The English Criminal Justice System is no exception and the concept has become institutionalised as if it were a true occurrence.

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

    However, there is a problem with the Thin Skull Rule as to what exactly is a mental or physical abnormality. For example, in Blaue, the victim refusing a blood transfusion on religious grounds was enough to make the defendant liable for her death through the Thin Skull Rule.

  2. Nina runs a burger bar. She puts up a sign in the window saying ...

    principle determinant of criminal liability given the other key elements being so wide. However, the Fraud Act 2006 contains no definition of 'dishonesty'. The Law Commission and Home Office intend that the Ghosh test, not Section 2 of the Theft Act 1968, should apply, and the Law Officers confirmed this in Parliament.

  1. The regulations on arrest and detention of offenders under the Police and Criminal Act ...

    This therefore creates an imbalance in the rights of the suspect and police power as corruption and deceit are very easily found and able to be committed when the suspect is being detained which further allows for false confessions to be made[7].

  2. 'Law should encourage citizens in their civic duty to do "the right thing" in ...

    The final duty is a duty which arises because the defendant has set in motion a chain of events. An example of this would be the case of Miller, where the defendant fell asleep with a cigarette, and set his mattress alight.

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