Criminal Law

Question 1

abuse of position

Answer 1

UK - a form of fraud in situations where the defendant has been put in a privileged position and thus is expected to safeguard another’s financial interest

Question 2

accessory after the fact

Answer 2

person who assists the principal after the crime has been committed

Question 3

actual bodily harm

Answer 3

not trivial or insignificant, but it doesn’t need to be permanent

Question 4

actus reus

Answer 4

the act or omission that the law seeks to prevent

Question 5

assault

Answer 5

actus reus: causing the victim to expect the infliction of violence
mens rea: basic intent (subjective test)

Question 6

basic intent

Answer 6

either intention or recklessness

Question 7

battery

Answer 7

actus reus: unlawful application of force to the body

mens rea: basic intent

Question 8

blackmail

Answer 8

unwarranted demand with menaces with a view to gain or cause loss to another. Called extortion in the US

Question 9

bribery

Answer 9

it is an offence either to offer or receive a bribe. A company can be found guilty if it failed to prevent bribery through adequate procedure

Question 10

burglary

Answer 10

unlawfully entering premises with the intent to steal or do harm

Question 11

corporate manslaughter

Answer 11

UK law.No doctrine of identification! An organisation will be guilty if there has been a general management failure at a senior level in which negligence has caused a death because of a gross breach of a duty of care

Question 12

criminal damage

Answer 12

a person destroys or damages property without a lawful excuse and with the intention to destroy or damage, or with recklessness

Question 13

defences

Answer 13

• insanity
• diminshed responsibility
• automatism
• mistake
• consent
• intoxication in cases of specific intent
• self-defence
• duress
• necessity

Question 14

doctrine of collective knowledge / aggravation test

Answer 14

a whole company is liable when no single individual had the mens rea but it can be put together from the collective knowledge of a group

Question 15

doctrine of identification

Answer 15

a company can be held liable directly because it is equated with an agent of the company, who must be a key/senior person

Question 16

embezzlement

Answer 16

US term for fraudulent conversion of property of another by a person in lawful possession of that property (verduistering)

Question 17

failing to disclose information

Answer 17

UK form of fraud, where the defendant did not disclose information to a third party while he had a legal duty to do so

Question 18

false pretences

Answer 18

US term for a type of fraud, where someone obtains a title to property of another by an intentional or knowing false statement with intent to defraud the other

Question 19

false representation

Answer 19

UK form of fraud, where a representation is made dishonestly with th eintention of making a gain or causing a loss

Question 20

felony

Answer 20

US term for the category of serious crimes

Question 21

fraud

Answer 21

UK: false representation, failing to disclose information and abuse of power

Question 22

grievous bodily harm/GBH

Answer 22

serious bodily injury

Question 23

gross negligence manslaughter

Answer 23

the performance of a lawful act, done with extreme negligence. A duty of care has been breached which has caused the death of the victim. This must be gross negligence.

Question 24

hacking

Answer 24

accessing computer systems or phones without authorisation

Question 25

handling stolen goods

Answer 25

receiving stolen goods, knowing them or believing them to be stolen (heling)

Question 26

homicide

Answer 26

general term for killing a person

Question 27

inchoate offence

Answer 27

incitement, conspiracy and attempt cover the preparatory stages of another criminal offence. It is unnecessary that the main offence is committed

Question 28

indictable offence

Answer 28

UK: serious crime

Question 29

intention

Answer 29

what did this particular defendant intend at the time of the offence? - direct intent: the consequence is desired - oblique intent: the consequence is not desired, but it is foreseen as virtually certain and the accused realised this

Question 30

involuntary manslaughter

Answer 30

an unlawful homicide where the necessary mens rea for murder is not present

Question 31

larceny

Answer 31

US term for theft

Question 32

manslaughter

Answer 32

unlawful killing not as serious as murder, either because of mitigating circumstances or because the mens rea for murder was not present - voluntary manslaughter - involuntary manslaughter: gross negligence or constructive (intent for a lesser criminal offence, killing someone in the process)

Question 33

mens rea

Answer 33

a reprehensible culpable state of mind

Question 34

misdemeanour

Answer 34

US term for less serious crimes

Question 35

MPC

Answer 35

model penal code, adopted (partially) in some US states

Question 36

murder

Answer 36

UK: actus reus: unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace mens rea: malice aforethought (voorbedachten rade); intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm resulting in death US: different per state, often first and second degree murder

Question 37

negligence

Answer 37

the defendant fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a reasonable person would have observed in that situation. Often, gross negligence is required

Question 38

omission

Answer 38

in common law, a mere omission cannot lead to criminal liability unless a statute specifically so provides

Question 39

principal

Answer 39

the main perpetrator of the offence. More than one: joint principals

Question 40

rape

Answer 40

actus reus: man intentionally penetrates a man or woman without consent (=free choice), and the man doesn't reasonably believe the person is consenting mens rea: intention

Question 41

recklessness

Answer 41

taking an unreasonable, unjustifiable risk. The defendant was aware of this risk but took it anyway. Subjective test.

Question 42

respondeat superior

Answer 42

US term. A company can be held criminally liable for the acts of its agents if the agent has carried out the actus reus with the required mens rea, as long as he acted within the scope of his employment and he intended to benefit the company

Question 43

secondary participation / accomplices / accessories

Answer 43

before the crime: - counselling - procuring during the crime: - aiding - abetting

Question 44

specific intent

Answer 44

not only the doint of an act, but doing it witch a specific intent makes the crime a specific intent crime. Only direct or oblique intent will suffice

Question 45

statutory assaults

Answer 45

aggravated assaults where the form of harm inflicted is more serious than for the common law crime of battery

Question 46

strict liability

Answer 46

no mens rea needs to be proved, an actus reus is sufficient for liability

Question 47

summary offence

Answer 47

UK: less serious crimes

Question 48

theft

Answer 48

dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving that other of it

Question 49

unlawful act manslaughter / constructive manslaughter

Answer 49

the defendant set out to commit a less serious offence but has in the process killed a person US: this may be felony murder

Question 50

vicarious liability

Answer 50

a person without personal fault may nevertheless be held vicariously liable for the criminal conduct of another, usually an employee

Question 51

voluntary manslaughter

Answer 51

the defendant has actus reus and mens rea for murder but certain kinds of mitigating circumstances partly excuse his behaviour