The Actus Reus

Although it can also cover, as well as the act, a failure to act, this is known as an omission, or a state of affairs.

A state of affairs is rare, but could occur when it is found to be unlawful for someone to remain in a country after their extradition has been ordered – which occurred in the case of Larsonneur 1933.

It is said that the actus reus must be voluntary on the part of the individual, however if the individual knew that they might lose control of their movements due to a health problem, then they would be liable; Broome v Perkins 1987.

The court has given examples where Involuntary Conduct may be used to counter liability of otherwise criminal actions:

• Reflex action
• Muscle spasm
• Being asleep
• Impaired consciousness
• Convulsions
• Automatism

Stung by bees

• Struck on Head
• Heart attack

Omissions

Liability can also be incurred for omissions

• Parent Child Relationship – Gibbons + Proctor

The Father of a child and his mistress failed to feed the child, it died of starvation, they were guilty of murder due to their omitting to act in caring for the child that was in their care.

• A duty that must be performed under contract of employment – Pittwood

A railway crossing attendant failed to shut a gate, which resulted in a member of the public being killed by a train whilst crossing the track, it was held that an omission through a contractual duty had taken place and the defendant was found guilty of manslaughter.

• Public Office – Police Officer – Dythem

Defendant failed to help a victim of a violent attack that was taking place, he was guilty of wilfully and without reasonable excuse neglecting to perform his duty.

• Duty is Voluntarily Undertaken – Stone v Dobinson

By taking in the defendant’s sister they were automatically owed a duty of care to her when she became ill.

• Resulting dangerous situation that was created by the defendant – Miller

A squatter failed to summon help or act when they started a fire, resulting in a conviction for arson.

Parliament may use acts or statutory instruments to lay out omissions as being able to satisfy the actus reus of a crime e.g. It is an offence not to report a road traffic accident.

Causation

This concerns the idea that “but for” the defendants actions, the consequences would not have occurred and also that the chain of causation has not been broken by any third party actions or any reasonably unforeseeable ones – this is called an intervening act.

In White 1910 the defendant attempted to kill his Mother by putting cyanide into her drink. She then died of a heart attack; the defendant therefore, was guilty of attempted murder.

The chain of causation may be broken by a third party; the victims own act or a natural but, unpredictable event.

For the chain of causation to break the intervening act must be sufficiently independent of the initial act and just as serious.

• Pagett 1983 – the defendants actions may cause foreseeable third party actions, which will not break the chain
• Medical treatment can only break the chain if it is sufficiently “potent” in causing death (Cheshire (1991))
• Defendant must take the victim as they find them, in the case of Blaue 1975; the victim was a Jehovah witness and therefore refused a blood transfusion
• Switching the life support machine off does not break the chain of causation (Malcherek (1981))
• If the victim reacts in a foreseeable way due to the defendant’s actions, the resulting injury will therefore have been caused by the defendant. (Roberts (1971)):- however, an unforeseeable action by the victim will be seen as being sufficient enough to break the chain of causation.