councidence of actus reus and mens rea

Question 1

fagan v MPC
FACTS

Answer 1

continuing act:
the defendant accidentally parked his car on a police officers foot and refused to move it

Question 2

fagan v MPC
LEGAL PRINCIPLE

Answer 2

The defendant argued that there was no confidence as actus reus come first mens rea after. However, the courts said the actus reus of rolling onto the foot and falling to remove is a continuing act as long as the mens rea forms at some point, this is enough the defendant is liable

Question 3

r v thabo meli
FACTS

Answer 3

series of events:
The defendants killed the victim and tried to make it look like an accident they hit him over the head and the victim fell unconscious. Believing he was dead they threw him off the cliff and as a result he died

Question 4

r v thabo meli
FACTS

Answer 4

The defendant argued: no coincidence as mens Rea comes first when actus reus not completes not present when actus reus actually committed as you can’t intend to kill a dead person. Courts said: actus reus can be a series of linked events/acts as long as mens Rea occurs at some point, that is enough, the defendant is liable