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

Explain in detail what actus reus and the chain of causation actually means.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Explain in detail what actus reus and the chain of causation actually means. The term actus reus is Latin for 'the guilty act'. It is essential in criminal law, as actus reus must be there for their to be a criminal offence. It can mean a guilty act or an omission to act. In the crime of murder, then the actus reus would be the killing of a human being. The act must be voluntary for the defendant to be guilty. For example, if the defendant acts out of reflex because of another force, it is not voluntary and the defendant cannot be found guilty. A good example can be found in the case of Hill v Baxter (1958) where a driver is being chased by a swarm of bees and driving a car in these conditions would be extremely hard so could not be held guilty for his actions. If the defendant is to be found guilty of an offence then it is important to prove that the defendant caused the offence in the first place. ...read more.

Middle

He was found guilty of manslaughter as the result would not have happened 'but for' the actions of the defendant. To break the chain of causation it would take actions of a third party intervening, the victim's own contribution to the events or a natural and unforeseen event such as an earthquake. It is no excuse if the victim has a medical condition to that means that they are more susceptible to injuries. It is unlucky on the attacker but the actus reus is still there. Te defendant should 'take the victim as they find them' and this is known as the 'thin skull rule.' Explain in detail what is meant by the term mens rea. Discuss the different types of mens rea a defendant might have. Mens rea is Latin for 'the guilty mind.' For a defendant to be found guilty of a crime, it must be proven that the defendant had the guilty mind to commit the actus reus. The defendant can only be found guilty of a crime, when both the actus reus and the mens rea are present. ...read more.

Conclusion

An example of this is the R V Latimer (1886) case where Latimer attempted to strike his intended victim but missed and hit a woman nearby. She was seriously injured and he was held liable for the injury caused. The mens rea was transferred from his intended victim to his actual victim. Another type of mens rea is recklessness. It is the lower level of mens rea and is the taking of an unjustifiable risk. It is broken down into subjective recklessness and objective recklessness. Subjective recklessness is the taking of an unjustifiable risk when the defendant realises that there is a risk but still carries out the action. An example of this is the R V Cunningham 1957 case, where the defendant tore off a gas meter from his cellar wall to steal the money inside it. The gas leaked and drifted up through the next house and injured a woman. The defendant did nothing to stop the as leak. He was being reckless and realising that a possibility of harm may result. Objective recklessness is where an unjustifiable risk is taken but the defendant does not realise that there is a risk, but an ordinary reasonable man would recognise the risk. Law Essay Law Lee Kirby ...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 Law of Tort 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 Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    "The Nedrick/Woolin direction on intention manages to produce a clear distinction between intention and ...

    4 star(s)

    Following the Nedrick/Woollin direction on intent, he would still be convicted of murder because the defendant realised that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty of his actions. In cases of conjoined twins, the courts have followed the line of Nedrick/Woollin in that an operation cannot go ahead

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    In the case of R v Birkin [1988] Crim LR 854, a punch was thrown which resulted in a broken jaw, but the eight months sentence was later reduced to six. Very often with sport if a criminal act had been committed the aggrieved party will choose not to make a complaint to the police at all.

  1. Fault Essay

    foresee the consequence and also it's not clear as to when this would move to the 'daft and unexpected' which according to Roberts would remove fault on the part of D.

  2. The terms Actus Reus and Mens Rea

    Fagan's actus reus was driving onto the police constable's foot which initially was accidental and without mens rea thus there is no crime. However, at the point which Fagan realised the situation and that the actus reus had occurred he demonstrated evidence of mens rea by telling the policeman "Fuck you, you can wait!"

  1. Any crime in law is made up of two elements, the actus reus which ...

    The actus reus of assault is the apprehension of immediate unlawful violence. The mens rea of assault is the intention to put the victim in fear of immediate unlawful physical harm or subjective recklessness as to whether they would fear immediate unlawful physical harm.

  2. Using actual situations, describe the elements of actus reus and mens rea in criminal ...

    The defendant was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm as the victim had been reduced to a mental state which, in itself, amounted to actual bodily harm (the extent of his injuries were disputed). The actus reus in assault occasioning actual bodily harm has two elements: assault (causing the other person to fear immediate unlawful force)

  1. Discussing Homicide - muder - actus reus.

    child if the intention was to kill the mother, rather than GBH, and certainly it would be murder if it was intended to cause the child to die after having been born alive. Anyway, let's move on. The original significance of this expression of 'under the Queen's peace' is somewhat

  2. In this report, the differences between contractual liability and tortuous liability are explained. In ...

    In its simplest form, cause in fact is established by evidence that shows that a tortfeasor's act or omission was a necessary antecedent to the plaintiff's injury. Courts analyze this issue by determining whether the plaintiff's injury would have occurred "but for" the defendant's conduct.

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