Actus Reus & Mens Rea Flashcards
(21 cards)
Kay v Butterworth
Accused of careless driving even though was asleep.
Shouldn’t have continued driving if new was tiered.
Considered voluntary
R v Cogdon
Mrs C has bad dreams
Killed daughter with axe
Involuntary as state of Somnambulism
R v Pitwood
Man paid to keep gate shut to railway. Failed to so person died
Did not fulfil contract
R v Miller
D fell asleep on mattress with lit cigarette
Woke up to mattress on fire but just moved to other room
Did not raise alarm or try to put fire out
R v Stone & Dobinson
S & D lived together low intelligence
Volunteered to look after S’s sister
Neglected her
Volunteered duty but didn’t fulfil
R v Dytham
Police officer guilty
Man being kicked to death and did nothing
Failed to perform his public duty
R v White
D put potassium cyanide in drink with intent to murder mother. Mother found dead afterwards. medical evidence showed would have be died of heart attack anyway. D convicted of attempted murder. not his act which caused her death. ‘BUT FOR’
R v Smith
D stabbed P twice with a bayonet. Carried by friends to medic, dropped twice. MO didn’t give proper medical care. However D’s conviction still held up as operative cause of death.
R v Cheshire
D shot the victim in leg. Died from complications caused by tracheotomy. D still guilty as only had tracheotomy because had been shot.
R v Pagett
D attempting to escape capture by armed police, used girlfriend as human shield. D fired at police, police fired back ,girlfriend died. D held guilty as foreseeable that police would shoot back and hit girl.
R v Corbett
Mentally handicapped man drinking all day. D hit V, V ran away, fell in gutter and got hit by car. foreseeable you would run away > fall over and if you fell in a road > get hit.
R v Muhammed
D racing +100mph on motorway > tire blew > Lost control of car > killing 3 yr old son, injuring wife and daughter. D argued tire blowing was break in causation but foreseeable that at that speed and age of car(16 yrs) that tire would give.
R v Blaue
Victim of stabbing Jehovah’s Witness as a result refused blood transfusion. Thin skull test says must take victim as find them so no break in chain of causation.
R v Gray
G killed 11 yr old son who was suffering from cancer.
Motive good but men’s rea and actus reus where established
R v Matthews & Alleyne
Test used by jury to assist them when deciding wether to infer intention
Nedrick test
Did the defendant appreciate that death or GBH was a virtual certain consequence of his/her actions
Cunningham recklessness
Defendant appreciated risk and took the risk anyway
R v Latimer
D aimed blow at someone with belt belt recoiled of that person and hit the victim who was severely injured
Transfered malace
R v Mitchell
D in argument in queue so pushed elderly man who fell on an elderly lady who died in hospital.
Act was not aimed at victim his act caused her death.
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commisioner
D told to move car moved car onto officers foot accidentally but then refused to move car
Coincidence of actus reus mens rea
R v Church
Man attacked women then put her in river as thought she was dead so she drowned
