Intro to Criminal Law and the Criminal Justice System

Question 1

what is a criminal sanction designed to do?

Answer 1

punish offenders, reduce crime, reform/habilitate offenders, protect public and enable offenders to make reparations to persons affected by their offences

Question 2

what are some examples of criminal sanctions?

Answer 2

imprisonment, community sentences e.g. unpaid work, fines

Question 3

what is the moralist approach?

Answer 3

criminalises conduct that is regarded as morally blameworthy even if no harm has been caused e.g. being found drunk and disorderly

Question 4

what is the issue with the moralist approach?

Answer 4

invasion of privacy

Question 5

which case concerns the defence of consent to assault?

Answer 5

R v Brown 1994

Question 5

what is the utilitarian approach?

Answer 5

criminalises conduct that is both blameworthy and causes identifiable harm e.g. rape, murder, assault, theft

Question 5

what is the rule of law?

Answer 5

there should be no criminal liability except for conduct specifically prescribed by law and the law should be clear with any ambiguity being interpreted in favour of the defendant

Question 6

do offences have a retrospective effect?

Answer 6

no- if it isn’t a crime when the action was done, it isn’t an offence

Question 7

where do all criminal cases begin?

Answer 7

magistrates’ court

Question 8

what are the 3 classifications of all criminal offences?

Answer 8

summary offences, either way offences, or indictable only offences

Question 8

what is a summary only offence?

Answer 8

less serious crimes usually motoring, assault, criminal damage to property no higher than £5000

Question 9

what are either-way offences?

Answer 9

middle range of offences tried in either magistrates’ or crown court e.g. theft, dangerous driving, burglary and certain types of assault

Question 10

what are indictable only offences?

Answer 10

most serious crimes e.g. murder, rape and robbery

Question 11

how is the defendant’s guilt determined?

Answer 11

the magistrates or a jury who assess the evidence

Question 12

what must happen before the accused is convicted?

Answer 12

proof that the accused committed the criminal behaviour with the required guilty state of mind

Question 13

what must the prosecution do in a criminal case?

Answer 13

prove that the defendant is guilty and disprove any defences given by the defendant

Question 14

what case is used to demonstrate the role of the prosecution?

Answer 14

Woolmington v DPP 1935

Question 15

what are the details of the Woolmington v DPP 1935 case?

Answer 15

D charged with murder having killed his wife by shooting her, HoL held that it was for the prosecution to prove that the defendant had intended to kill his wife, not for the D to prove he didn’t

Question 15

what does the evidential burden refer to?

Answer 15

the defence must raise some evidence of the fact in issue to convince the court that the matter deserves consideration (pros must disprove beyond all reasonable doubt)

Question 15

what is the Criminal Cases Review Commission?

Answer 15

an independent body established by s 11 of the Criminal Appeals Act 1995- role is to enquire into a case and refer it to the Appeal Courts once all normal avenues have been exhausted

Question 16

what are the 3 components to a conviction?

Answer 16

guilt conduct by the D, guilty state of mind of the D, absence of any valid defence

Question 17

what is actus reus?

Answer 17

guilty conduct by the defendant

Question 18

what is mens rea?

Answer 18

guilty state of mind of the D

Question 19

what are the 3 components to actus reus?

Answer 19

an act (or failure to act) by the D, the existence of certain circumstances at the time of the D’s conduct, certain consequences flowing from the Ds conduct

Question 20

what are conduct crimes?

Answer 20

involves an act in which only the forbidden act must be proved (the d’s behaviour is criminalised rather than an outcome)

Question 21

what is a result crime?

Answer 21

causation must be established before the actus reus can be proved e.g. property must be damaged

Question 22

what are states of affairs crimes?

Answer 22

the D doesn’t have to actually do anything to be convicted- the actus reus is satisfied by the existence of a state of affairs/set of circumstances

Question 23

what case is used to demonstrate states of affairs crimes?

Answer 23

R v Larsonneur 1933- French citizen deported from Ireland to England against her will convicted of being found illegally in the UK despite the fact she had no choice

Question 24

what are the four types of situation under the common law in which a person can commit the actus reus of a crime by failing to act?

Answer 24

special relationships, voluntary assumption of care, cross over between special relationship and voluntary assumption of care, a contractual duty to act

Question 25

what case is used to demonstrate special relationships?

Answer 25

R v Gibbins and Proctor 1918

Question 26

what are the details of R v Gibbins Proctor 1918?

Answer 26

D conviected of murdering child who died of starvation, Gibbins was father so court held that he had a DoC- omission to feed the child

Question 26

what case is used to demonstrate voluntary assumption of care?

Answer 26

R v Stone and Robinson 1977- two defendants took in Stone’s sister and were convicted of manslaughter because she died of infected bed sores- they were convicted because they failed to sufficiently care for her

Question 27

what case demonstrates a contractual duty to act?

Answer 27

R v Pittwood 1902- defendant railway worker employed to guard the gate at a level crossing- he failed to open the gate on one occasion and a person was killed by a train- he was convicted of manslaughter

Question 28

what is a statutory duty to act?

Answer 28

when a legislative provision imposes a duty on individuals to act in a certain way in a given set of circumstances e.g. Children Act 1989

Question 29

what are voluntary acts?

Answer 29

liability will only accrue if the conduct is willed and not just a reflex movement e.g. a man fainting onto someone while unconscious wouldn’t be convicted of assault

Question 30

what is the defence of automatism?

Answer 30

the D alleges that their conduct was involuntary e.g. falling asleep at the wheel is involuntary but arguably the D’s fault

Question 31

what does causation apply to?

Answer 31

result crimes because the prosecution must demonstrate that the accused’s act or omission actually caused the prohibited sequence

Question 32

what is factual causation?

Answer 32

principle that the D cannot be considered to be the cause of an event if it would have occurred in exactly the same way without the D’s act or omission

Question 33

what is legal causation?

Answer 33

when the D was an operating/substantial cause of the consequence

Question 34

what situations were set out to help courts determine legal causation?

Answer 34

where the victim acts in a particular way, where an act by the other person intervenes, where an event occurs between conduct and result, injuries inflicted by D were an operating/substantial cause despite an intervening event, if the intervening event was forseeable

Question 34

what is novus actus interveniens?

Answer 34

‘a new and intervening act’- this breaks the chain of causation therefore D not the cause of the result and is absolved of liability for it

Question 35

what case is used to demonstrate legal causation?

Answer 35

R v Dalloway 1847- D negligently driving a horse and cart not holding reins when a child ran in front and was killed- if the man was holding the reins would the child have died? Jury said yes so he was acquitted

Question 36

what are escape cases?

Answer 36

court considers how foreseeable a victim’s response of escape was

Question 36

what is the relevance of a victim’s acts?

Answer 36

if the victim does something after the initial act or omission but before the consequence occurs, the intervention is voluntary so legal causation of the D wont be established

Question 37

what case is used to demonstrate escape cases?

Answer 37

R v Roberts 1971- victim jumped out of moving car to escape unwabted sexual advances from the D- the D convicted of assault even though technically it was teh victim’s own fault