Criminal law quiz
46 Questions
7 Views

Choose a study mode

Play Quiz
Study Flashcards
Spaced Repetition
Chat to Lesson

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What must the prosecution establish for a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt?

  • The Actus Reus was committed. (correct)
  • The community's perception of the crime.
  • The charges are purely circumstantial.
  • The defendant's financial status.
  • What does the defense primarily aim to challenge in a criminal case?

  • The conduct of law enforcement during the arrest.
  • The jurisdiction of the court.
  • Public opinion about the case.
  • Whether the Actus Reus or Mens Rea was established. (correct)
  • Which of the following components is NOT part of the Actus Reus?

  • Result.
  • Circumstance.
  • Mens Rea. (correct)
  • Conduct.
  • In most cases, what must be proven alongside Actus Reus for liability?

    <p>Mens Rea. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is an example of a Statutory/Offence-Specific Duty?

    <p>Providing a breath test when required by law. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What type of duty applies when a parent fails to provide care?

    <p>Familial Duty. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following is an example of an Assumption of Responsibility?

    <p>Voluntarily taking in a stray pet. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which scenario would likely NOT lead to liability for omission to act?

    <p>Ignoring a request for assistance from a stranger. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does a novus actus interveniens need to be in order to break the chain of causation?

    <p>Unforeseeable and independent (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does the term 'actus reus' refer to in the context of criminal law?

    <p>The physical act or omission leading to a crime (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Why was Empress Cars held liable in the given case?

    <p>The pollution was due to their failure to secure the tank (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following is NOT a type of mens rea?

    <p>Innocence (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which type of event is classified as an act of God in breaking the chain of causation?

    <p>Acts of Nature (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What characterizes a successful intervening act?

    <p>It must be independent of D's actions (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is required to establish causation in criminal law?

    <p>Demonstration of factual and legal causation (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In a criminal case, what does 'beyond a reasonable doubt' signify?

    <p>A high standard of proof implying certainty (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary requirement for a chain of causation to remain intact?

    <p>D's actions must lead directly to the result (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What complicates the application of causation principles in legal cases?

    <p>Subjectivity in determining foreseeability (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which scenario best illustrates the concept of recklessness in mens rea?

    <p>A driver speeding to reach an important meeting (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does the 'but for' test determine in the context of factual causation?

    <p>If the harm would have occurred without the defendant's actions (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The concept of chain of causation primarily refers to what?

    <p>The connection between a defendant's actions and the outcome (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which example best represents an omission that could lead to criminal liability?

    <p>A caregiver failing to feed a dependent child (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following components is NOT part of the elements of criminal conviction?

    <p>Intent to plead (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What principle determines if a third party's actions are foreseeable in establishing liability?

    <p>Voluntariness (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In which case did a child’s intervention not break the chain of causation despite being an independent act?

    <p>R v Michael (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must occur for a doctor's actions to break the chain of causation?

    <p>The treatment must be 'palpably wrong'. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is a significant factor in liability when assessing a doctor’s intervention?

    <p>Severity of initial injury (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which scenario exemplifies a case where the original injury was still significant despite flawed medical treatment?

    <p>R v Smith (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which factor would NOT likely lead to breaking the chain of causation by a non-medical third party?

    <p>Immediate reaction to a threat (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must be demonstrated for a medical professional's actions to be deemed 'palpably wrong'?

    <p>Actions must be clearly misguided. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In R v Pagett, what crucial factor contributed to the causation finding?

    <p>The use of a human shield. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must an act do to potentially break the chain of causation?

    <p>Be significant and unforeseeable (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following scenarios could demonstrate D's intervention breaking the causal chain?

    <p>D injures V, and V is later struck by lightning (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary criterion for determining if V's actions maintain the chain of causation?

    <p>Foreseeability of V's reaction (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In R v Gowans [2003], why did the court find that the infection did not break the chain of causation?

    <p>The infection was foreseeable with severe injury (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following natural events is likely to be deemed as foreseeable?

    <p>A high tide occurring during a full moon (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which aspect of V's actions can affect whether the chain of causation remains intact?

    <p>The voluntariness of V's response (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What factor is considered when determining if an intervening natural event breaks the chain of causation?

    <p>If the event was foreseeable (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In R v Roberts [1971], why were V's actions considered to not break the chain of causation?

    <p>V's actions were deemed voluntary and foreseeable (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is considered recklessness according to the court's ruling?

    <p>Having a fleeting awareness of a risk and disregarding it. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does the objective test in the Ghosh case assess?

    <p>If the defendant's conduct was deemed dishonest by reasonable people. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In Ivey v Genting Casinos, what is part of the new test for dishonesty?

    <p>Determining the defendant’s actual knowledge or belief about the facts. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was one criticism of the Ghosh test?

    <p>It allowed defendants with skewed moral views to evade liability. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was the legal issue in R v Ghosh?

    <p>Assessing whether a medical professional can claim fees for unperformed procedures. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What did the two-part test established in Ghosh require?

    <p>Both an objective assessment and a subjective realization from the defendant. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was Dr. Ghosh's defense in his case?

    <p>He believed he was entitled to the money he claimed. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Flashcards

    Actus Reus

    The physical act or omission that forms the basis of a crime.

    Mens Rea

    The mental state or intent required for a crime. It's about the guilty mind.

    Intention (Mens Rea)

    A deliberate and conscious decision to cause a specific outcome.

    Recklessness (Mens Rea)

    Awareness of a risk and choosing to take that risk anyway.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Negligence (Mens Rea)

    Failing to act with the care a reasonable person would in the same situation.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Factual Causation

    The "but for" test: would the harm have occurred if the defendant hadn't acted?

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Legal Causation

    The defendant's action must be a significant cause of the harm, even if other factors were involved.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Beyond Reasonable Doubt

    The standard of proof in criminal cases. The prosecution must convince the court there's no reasonable doubt the defendant is guilty.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Omission Liability

    Legal responsibility for failing to act when there's a duty to do so.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    What does the prosecution need to prove?

    The prosecution must prove the defendant's actions meet the Actus Reus (physical act) and Mens Rea (guilty mind) elements of the crime.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    What is the defense's role?

    To cast doubt on the Actus Reus, Mens Rea, or causation, or to argue for valid defenses, such as self-defense.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    What makes up the Actus Reus?

    The Actus Reus includes the defendant's conduct, the circumstances surrounding the act, and the result of the act, if applicable.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Actus Reus and Mens Rea Relationship

    The Actus Reus (action) and Mens Rea (intent) must coincide for criminal liability. The defendant's wrongful conduct must be coupled with a guilty mind.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Circumstances of Omission Liability

    Liability arises from statutory duties, contractual duties, familial duties, assumption of responsibility, and certain special relationships.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Statutory Duty

    A legal requirement to act, often enforced by a specific law, like providing a breathalyzer test to a police officer.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Contractual Duty

    An obligation to act based on a contract, like a lifeguard's duty to rescue swimmers.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Novus Actus Interveniens

    A new, independent act that breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's actions and the result, potentially absolving them from liability.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Foreseeable Act

    An event that can reasonably be anticipated in a given situation, even if it's not certain to happen.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Independent Act

    An intervening act that is not triggered or caused by the defendant's actions, but occurs independently.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Chain of Causation

    The unbroken connection between the defendant's actions and the final result, showing how their conduct led to the outcome.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Does the act break the chain?

    To determine if the act breaks the chain of causation, we consider if it was foreseeable and independent.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Third-party Actions

    Acts performed by someone other than the defendant or victim that can significantly impact the chain of causation.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Victim's Own Actions

    Acts performed by the victim in response to the defendant's actions, which might influence legal responsibility.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Empress Cars: Secure the Tank!

    The company was held liable because they failed to adequately secure their diesel tank, making third-party tampering a foreseeable risk.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Breaking the Chain

    When an event happens after the defendant's actions, making them not responsible for the outcome.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Unforeseeable Intervention

    An event that happens after the defendant's actions that no reasonable person could have predicted.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Significant Intervention

    An event that's major enough to be the real cause of the outcome, not just a minor detail.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Intervention by D

    The defendant themselves causes a new event after their initial actions, potentially changing the outcome.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Intervention by Nature

    Natural events like earthquakes or floods that happen after the defendant's actions.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Foreseeable Intervention by Nature

    When a natural event is something that could reasonably be expected, it won't break the chain.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Unforeseeable Intervention by Nature

    When a natural event is rare and unpredictable, it can absolve the defendant from responsibility.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Victim's Response

    The victim's reaction to the defendant's actions can either break or continue the chain of responsibility.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Ghosh Test for Dishonesty

    A two-part test used to determine if a defendant's conduct was dishonest. It involves assessing whether the conduct was objectively dishonest and if the defendant subjectively believed their actions were dishonest.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Objective Test (Ghosh)

    This part of the test examines if the defendant's actions were dishonest by the standards of reasonable and honest people.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Subjective Test (Ghosh)

    This part considers if the defendant realized that reasonable people would view their actions as dishonest, regardless of their personal beliefs.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Criticism of Ghosh Test

    The Ghosh test was criticized for being confusing and allowing defendants to escape liability by claiming ignorance of societal norms, even if their actions were morally wrong.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017)

    This landmark case replaced the Ghosh test for dishonesty with a single, objective test.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    New Test for Dishonesty (Ivey)

    The new test asks: 1. What were the defendant's actual beliefs about the facts? 2. Were the defendant's actions dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Edge-sorting

    A technique used in gambling where a player subtly identifies and exploits variations in the patterns on playing cards to gain an advantage.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Ivey's Defense

    Mr. Ivey claimed he did not believe he was cheating, arguing that he was simply using his skill and knowledge to gain an advantage.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Study Notes

    Criminal Law Overview

    • Criminal law defines unacceptable behaviour and outlines consequences for violations.
    • It aims to deter and prevent crime.
    • Procedural law governs legal processes, while substantive law defines specific offences and punishments.
    • Criminology studies crime causes.
    • Evidence law governs admissible evidence in court.

    Social Function of Criminal Law

    • Criminal law identifies and responds to deviant or harmful actions.
    • It reflects society's values and moral standards.
    • Criminal law involves state intervention to address social harm.

    Criminal vs. Civil Wrongs

    • Criminal wrongs are offences against the state or society.
    • Civil wrongs involve disputes between individuals seeking compensation.

    Purpose: Deterrence and Prevention

    • Deterrence aims to prevent individuals from committing crimes through punishment.
    • Prevention seeks to stop crime before it happens.
    • There is debate over effectiveness of deterrence.

    Symbolic Function

    • Criminal law signifies social values and sets boundaries for acceptable behaviour.
    • It establishes a framework for societal standards of right and wrong.

    Stigmatization and Criminal Record

    • Criminal convictions result in negative social consequences (stigma).
    • Stigma can negatively affect social standing and opportunities.

    Key Players in Criminal Justice System

    • Police: Investigate and arrest suspects.
    • CPS (Crown Prosecution Service): Represents the state in prosecuting alleged offenders.
    • Defendant: Individual accused of a crime.
    • Defence Counsel/Team: Represents the defendant's interests.
    • Jury (Crown Court): Determines guilt or innocence.
    • Judge/Magistrate: Oversees the trial and issues rulings.
    • Witnesses/Experts: Provide testimony or specialist knowledge.
    • Victim: Plays a role as a witness and may seek compensation.

    Criminal Defences

    • Adults: Individuals over 18
    • Children/Minors: Individuals 10 and above, with specific legal considerations.

    Core Principles of English Criminal Law

    • Presumption of Innocence: Defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty.
    • Burden of Proof: Prosecutions must prove all elements of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt, while defence has to cast doubt on the case.

    Seriousness of Offences

    • Severity of offenses can affect how the offense is charged and punished.

    Trial Outcomes

    • Verdicts in criminal trials are "Guilty" or "Not Guilty."

    Sentencing

    • Courts have some flexibility, sometimes with mandatory or fixed penalties.

    Principles Guiding Criminal Law

    • Fair Warning: Laws should be clear and easily understood (to avoid ambiguity).

    Racism in Criminal Justice System

    • The UK criminal justice system has experienced racial disparities in treatment, including over-policing of minority communities and under-evaluation of minority victims.
    • This has led to racial disparities in outcomes.
    • Systemic racism creates lasting inequality. Various reports (e.g., the Macpherson Report) highlight these disparities.
    • High police budgets are seen as not resolving but perpetuating racial disparity.

    Principles of Criminal Law

    • Fair Warning: Laws should be clear and understandable so individuals know what's prohibited.
    • Fair Labelling: Offenses need to accurately reflect the nature of the crime.

    Abolition of Prisions

    • Abolitionists argue that prisons and policing inadequately address societal problems.
    • Abolitionists suggest creating alternative systems for dealing with criminal behaviour that seek to address the root causes of crime (e.g., poverty, lack of social services).
    • Abolitionists favour investments in social services, housing, and employment as approaches to dealing with crime.

    Actus Reus and Mens Rea

    • Actus Reus (Guilty Act): The physical act or omission constituting the offense. Examples include acts like assault or theft.
    • Mens Rea (Guilty Mind): The mental state or intent required to commit the offense. Types include Intention (direct or oblique), Recklessness, and Negligence.

    Causation

    • Factual Causation: But-for test: Would the result have occurred without the defendant's actions?
    • Legal Causation: Are the defendant's actions the significant and operative cause of the result, and are the intervening events reasonably foreseeable?

    Omission Liability

    • Usually not liable for failing to act unless a specific duty exists (e.g., contractual duty, assumed responsibility).
    • A duty to act may arise from a special relationship. (e.g., parent/child, caregiver/elderly).
    • A person creates a dangerous situation, there may be a duty to prevent the harm escalating.

    Intervening Acts (Novus Actus Interveniens)

    • An intervening act may break the chain of causation.
    • This happens if the intervening act is unforeseeable.
    • A third party's voluntary act may break the causal chain if unforeseeable or independent, not reasonably foreseeable, and significant.

    Mens Rea: Intention and Oblique Intention

    • Direct Intent: The defendant's goal is the harmful result.
    • Oblique Intent: The harmful result was virtually certain to follow from the defendant's actions, and they foresaw that.

    Recklessness

    • Subjective Recklessness (Cunningham): The defendant foresaw a risk but went ahead anyway, knowing it was unreasonable considering the circumstances.
    • Objective Recklessness (Caldwell): A reasonable person in the defendant's circumstances would have foreseen the risk.
    • Subjective test returned in modern cases
    • Consider the circumstances and the risk of harm.

    Dishonesty

    • Ghosh Test: Two-part subjective/objective test. Involves a reasonableness test in terms of societal norms and whether the defendant was aware they were acting dishonestly. In 2017 this was superseded by the objective test in Ivey

    Negligence

    • Negligence is failing to meet a reasonable standard of care.
    • Key Case: Adomako (1995) - an anesthetist failed to notice a disconnected oxygen tube during surgery which led to patient death.

    Homicide Offences

    • Murder is the most serious offence involving unlawful killings.
    • Manslaughter is a less serious offence.
    • Voluntary manslaughter involve partial defences to reduce liability. (e.g. loss of control, diminished responsibility).
    • Involuntary manslaughter involves unintentional killings due to gross negligence. Examples include medical negligence cases.

    Partial Defences to Murder

    • Loss of Control: Situations where the defendant acted due to a qualifying trigger, like fear of violence or something said/done, leading to a loss of self-control that is relevant and reasonable in the circumstances.
    • Diminished Responsibility: Defendants with unusual mental conditions that reduce their capacity for rational judgment affecting the ability to control their actions.

    General Defences

    • Self-defence: The use of reasonable force to protect oneself or another from imminent harm.

    Insanity

    • A legal defence available to those who were suffering from a diagnosed mental health condition at the time of the crime which makes them unable to comprehend the nature of their actions.

    Intoxication

    • Voluntary intoxication: generally not a defence to most crimes including murder, manslaughter, and other harm offences. Intoxication might diminish responsibility/capacity but seldom a direct defence in such circumstances.
    • Involuntary intoxication: Where the defendant is involuntarily intoxicated such as following the influence of a substance (in excess, in error or as a result of a medical condition). It may be used as a defense to argue lack of intent that might otherwise have been considered as a crime.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Related Documents

    Criminal Law Notes PDF
    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Browser