• 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...


Criminal Law Michealmas Term Essay 1 Questions about causation are simple factual ones. Therefore juries require no direction in answering them. Discuss Causation is an element of 'Result Crimes', in which the conduct itself does not constitute a crime, for example, shooting a gun, but rather the conduct along with it's harmful consequence, for example, shooting a gun at a person and the person dying. It is this gap between the conduct and harmful result, which gives rise to the uncertainty as to who's conduct caused the harmful result, and even if the harmful result was due to a human action, or just a natural event. When determining the chain of causal events leading up to a result, only the facts are relevant. However, once the causes are determined, principles of law must be applied to identify which of these causal acts were unlawful, as a person cannot be convicted for an innocent act. Therefore, causation is a question of fact and law. ...read more.


To make causation even more complicated, substansive events can occur following the original harm action, which rob the original action of responsibility for the result. This is providing it can be found that the second act significantly altered the course of events, which would have occurred, following the first act. The person who committed the original act is still charged, but not for the result which occurred. These are known as 'intervening acts'. This is shown in Jordan, where the jury ruled that the hospital's incompetence was more to blame for the victim's death, rather than the original assailant, whose actions were not lethal, therefore the medical staff held responsible. The complications of what constitutes an intervening act, then arise. Firstly, the intervening act must be so abnormal, that a reasonable person would not foresee it occurring in the course of events following the original action. Secondly, intention for the result, or 'causal energy', of the actor's (from the original and intervening act), must be measure. ...read more.


This belief is mimicked in Malcherek and Steel. Where the above issues arise, the judge should, if not intervene, direct the jury as to the moral issues involved. Furthermore, in English criminal law, the victim can bare no responsibility for the crime committed, even if it were not for their negligence or refusal to seek remedy, the harm result would not have been so severe. This is displayed in the case of Blaue. This liberal concept that a person should never be discriminated against for acting within their basic rights (for example: freedom of religion; freedom to move freely in the world as they please) is quite a difficult one for a jury to uphold. For example (1.3), 'in the eyes of the law' a female doctor who is sexually assaulted whist walking through a town centre in mid-afternoon, is indifferent to a prostitute who is sexually assaulted whist walking through a 'red-light' district at midnight. However, the jury consist of lay people from all aspects of society, who are susceptible to the common stereotypes and prejudices society breeds. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE 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 GCSE Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Law - Resulting trusts

    4 star(s)

    In McFarlane v McFarlane28 It held that the wife had no beneficial interest in two houses because there had been no prior agreement, arrangement or understanding between herself and her husband sufficient to show a mutual intention to create such an interest.

  2. Study the concept of Reasonable man and reasonability in tort law.

    Was the court in effect saying reasonable mothers make mistake and should not be penalized for them. In Porter v barking and Dagenham London Borough Council a 14 year old boy injured when he and a friend were allowed

  1. Criminal Law (Offences against the person) - revision notes

    - Smith got into an argument and killed someone. Raised 3 defences: - 1. Provocation 2. Diminished responsibility 3. Self defence He was convicted of murder and appealed to the COA and then HOL who said, "His clinical depression which may have reduced his level of control should have been put to the jury" Cumulative provocation - Battered wife

  2. The Age Of Criminal Responsibility

    gain a good base of information from which I can then progress onto some other, more recognised credible sources. Most of the time you can find the more credible sites in the references section of the Wikipedia page. Calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility rejected (BBC NEWS)

  1. Law of Homicide

    whose motivations are intensely personal and individual. If any of this defences are applied on the case the charges can be reduce to voluntary manslaughter, where as murder but a defence of diminished responsibility, provocation or suicide pact applies. They could also be given a lesser sentence than live can be given.

  2. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    the discharge of the instrument, and (ii) discharge of one or more parties from liability on the instrument. Discharge of the Instrument: A negotiable instrument is said to be discharged when it becomes completely useless, i.e. no action on that will lie, and it cannot be negotiated further.

  1. Discover whether, in the criminal law, negligence ever breaks the chain of causation and ...

    Another principle the courts look for is what is known as the "but for" principle (sometimes known as "causation - in - fact"). This can be explained by saying that something would not have happened "but for" D's actions. For example, the victim would not have died but for D's strangling him.

  2. The criminal process

    are there more 'public' factors favouring a prosecution than opposing it. When deciding whether to continue with the prosecution in the public's interest the CPS take into account the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the offender and decide on balance whether a prosecution would be the best option or whether another course of action should be followed.

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