This chapter focuses on the interaction between actus reus and mens rea in proving criminal liability. It first considers how actus reus and mens rea relate to one another within the structure of an offence before discussing the issues that also emerge when applying offence requirements to a set of facts. As an example, it explains how every element (conduct, circumstance, and result) of an offence includes an actus reus requirement and a corresponding mens rea requirement. It also examines the correspondence principle and the doctrine of transferred malice, along with the coincidence principle. Finally, it outlines potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus and mens rea of an offence when applying the law in problem-type questions. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.
Chapter
John Child and David Ormerod
This chapter focuses on the offence of murder within the context of criminal law, with particular emphasis on its problematic and controversial nature. It first considers the definition of murder in terms of actus reus and mens rea. It then discusses the defences to murder, including general defences, specific complete defences, and partial defences (e.g. loss of self-control, diminished responsibility, and suicide pact). It also outlines potential options for legal reform concerning the mandatory life sentence and the mens rea of murder, and concludes by presenting a structure for applying the actus reus and mens rea for murder to problem facts. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, and there are also boxes that highlight common pitfalls to avoid and other areas of confusion for those new to the law.
Chapter
John Child and David Ormerod
This chapter provides an overview of mens rea, loosely translated as ‘guilty mind’. Whereas the actus reus of an offence focuses on the accused’s conduct, the results of that conduct, and the circumstances in which it takes place (external elements), mens rea focuses on what is going on in the accused’s mind (internal elements). The chapter first considers the elements of criminal liability under mens rea versus actus reus before discussing the legal meaning of central mens rea terms such as ‘intention’, ‘negligence’, ‘dishonesty’, and ‘recklessness’ and how these terms work in the context of a whole offence. It also describes certain offences that require actus reus elements with no corresponding mens rea and vice versa. Finally, it outlines a structure for analysing the mens rea of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter.
Chapter
John Child and David Ormerod
This chapter provides an overview of actus reus, which refers to the ‘external elements’ of an offence. An actus reus is not simply about the movements of the accused, that is, her conduct. Rather, it includes any offence requirement that is external from the mind of the accused: anything that is not mens rea. Before discussing the elements that form the actus reus, this chapter considers the distinction between actus reus and mens rea. It then describes the three elements of actus reus: conduct, circumstances, and results. It also explains the categories of actus reus offences, omissions liability, and causation before concluding with sections that outline potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with a brief summary of the main facts and judgment.
Chapter
This chapter provides an overview of mens rea, loosely translated as ‘guilty mind’. Whereas the concept of actus reus focusses on the external elements of an offence, mens rea focusses on state of mind or fault. The mens rea of the offence describes the fault element with which D acted: D intended, believed, foresaw as a risk of the proscribed element; and so on. The chapter first considers how offences differ in the role mens rea plays. For some offences a mens rea element may be required in relation to each actus reus element; for other offences there are actus reus elements that do not have a corresponding mens rea and vice versa. The chapter moves on to discuss the legal meaning of central mens rea terms such as ‘intention’, ‘negligence’, ‘dishonesty’, and ‘recklessness’. Finally, it outlines reform debates, and a structure for analysing the mens rea of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter.
Chapter
This chapter provides an overview of actus reus, which refers to the ‘external elements’ of an offence. These external elements do not simply relate to D’s conduct. Rather, as we will see, the actus reus of an offence includes any offence elements outside of the fault element (‘mens rea’) of the offence. Before discussing the elements that form the actus reus, this chapter considers the distinction between actus reus and mens rea. It then describes the three elements of actus reus: conduct, circumstances, and results. It also explains the categories of actus reus offences, omissions liability, and causation before concluding with sections that outline potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus of an offence when applying the law in a problem-type question. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with a brief summary of the main facts and judgment.
Chapter
This chapter focuses on the interaction between actus reus and mens rea in proving criminal liability. It first considers how actus reus and mens rea relate to one another within the structure of an offence before discussing the issues that also emerge when applying offence requirements to a set of facts. As an example, it explains how every element (conduct, circumstance, and result) of an offence includes an actus reus requirement and a potential corresponding mens rea requirement. It also examines the correspondence principle and the doctrine of transferred malice, along with the coincidence principle. Finally, it outlines potential options for legal reform and a structure for analysing the actus reus and mens rea of an offence when applying the law in problem-type questions. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.
Chapter
This chapter focuses on the offence of murder within the context of criminal law, with particular emphasis on its problematic and controversial nature. It first considers the definition of murder in terms of actus reus and mens rea. It then discusses the defences to murder, including general defences, specific complete defences, and partial defences (eg loss of self-control, diminished responsibility, and suicide pact). It also outlines potential options for legal reform concerning the mandatory life sentence and the mens rea of murder, and concludes by presenting a structure for applying the actus reus and mens rea for murder to problem facts. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, and there are also boxes that highlight common pitfalls to avoid and other areas of confusion for those new to the law.
Chapter
John Child and David Ormerod
This chapter deals with general complete defences that the accused can use to avoid liability. The focus is on defences that can apply (with one exception) to offences throughout the criminal law and will result in the accused’s acquittal. Five kinds of general complete defences are examined: insanity (as a defence), duress by threats, duress by circumstances, the public and private defence (also known as self-defence), and necessity. The chapter first considers the categorical division between excuses and justifications, before explaining the elements of each of the defences in turn. It then outlines potential options for legal reform concerning individual defences and concludes by discussing the application of the general defences to problem facts. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.
Chapter
This chapter deals with general complete defences that the accused can use to avoid liability. The focus is on defences that can apply (with one exception) to offences throughout the criminal law and will result in the accused’s acquittal. Five kinds of general complete defences are examined: insanity (as a defence), duress by threats, duress by circumstances, the public and private defence (also known as self-defence), and necessity. The chapter first considers the categorical division between excuses and justifications, before explaining the elements of each of the defences in turn. It then outlines potential options for legal reform concerning individual defences and concludes by discussing the application of the general defences to problem facts. Relevant cases are highlighted throughout the chapter, with brief summaries of the main facts and judgments.
