Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Actus Reus
Actus Reus
Actus Reus
o R v Stone and Dobinson 1977- sister of one of the Ds moved in, eventually
dying from malnutrition etc. Both Ds convicted of manslaughter; one due to
relationship and other as they had fed/bathed V at least once.
o R v Nicholls 1874- child died after moving in with grandmother.
o R v Instan 1893- niece failed to care for aunt after moving in during illness.
o R v Ruffell 2003- V injected heroin and became ill. D put him outside where
he subsequently died.
Duty through ones official position:
o Dytham 1979- policeman watched V be kicked to death by men; didnt
interfere and afterwards said he was going off-duty. Convicted of misconduct
in a public office.
A duty arising from setting a chain of events into motion: occurs when D
inadvertently creates dangerous situations without mens rea. If he becomes aware of it
and doesnt summon help, D can be criminally liable.
o R v Miller 1983- D slept whilst smoking; awoke to find mattress on fire.
Moved to another room and did nothing. Arson conviction.
o Santana-Bermudez 2003- D didnt tell police about needles in pocket before
search; police officer injured by needles. S. 47 conviction.
o R v Khan (Rungzabe) 1998- appellant sold heroin to 15yr old new user; went
into coma on Ds premises. Died after being left alone- retrial ordered, but
Court of Appeal thought a duty to summon medical help could exist.
o R v Evans 2009- D gave heroin to V who overdosed; D and mother put V to
bed where V died during the night. Gross negligence manslaughter- duty to act
as they had contributed to Vs situation.
Involuntary manslaughter and omissions
Unlawful act manslaughter cannot occur via omissions; it requires a positive act.
o Lowe 1973- D was father of baby who became ill and died. D had low IQ and
failed to take baby to a doctor. No act. Manslaughter conviction quashed.
Duty of Doctors
If discontinuation of treatment is in best interest of patient, then such an omission is
not sufficient for the actus reus of a crime.
o Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993- V had been crushed during Hillsborough
football tragedy, and was in a persistent vegetative state and was fed
artificially through tubes. Court ruled that feeding could be withdrawn.
Comment and Reform concerning Omissions
All five common law duties lack clarity. What is a special relationship?
Being liable due to a voluntary duty could be unfair, and discourage people from
helping others in case they are convicted of a crime.
Medical treatment- euthanasia by a positive act still remains unlawful- fair?
Statutory duties- people unaware of them?
Moral/legal obligation to help.
Good Samaritan Law- e.g. as in France and the Netherlands. People responsible for
helping strangers in emergency situations. But what is an emergency? How can it be
enforced if a number of people witness a situation? Rogues may take advantage, or
people may intervene and put themselves in danger or make the situation worse.
Causation
Where a consequence must be proved, the prosecution must show that:
2
o R v Williams and Davis 1991- Ds picked up V, who leapt from car and died
whilst escaping robbery attempt. Convicted of robbery and manslaughter;
latter quashed.
Daftness- the jury should consider:
o If it was foreseeable that some harm was likely to result from threat.
o If the deceaseds reaction was an expected response in the situation.
Thin-skull rule- D must take V as they find them. This extends to existing physical
or physiological conditions, as well as religious beliefs.
o Hayward 1908- D made violent threats and chased wife outside. She collapsed
and died due to heart condition. Held that proof of death from fright alone,
caused by illegal conduct, would suffice for manslaughter.
o Blaue 1975- D stabbed V, who refused a life saving blood transfusion due to
being a Jehovahs Witness. V died; D charged with murder.
o R v Holland 1841- D injured V, causing blood poisoning in finger. V refused
amputation, got lockjaw, and died. D convicted.
o Dear 1996- V didnt seek medical attention for artery-severing wounds, and
had apparently exacerbated and reopened them. D still convicted of murder.
Intervening acts- must be sufficiently independent of Ds conduct and be serious
enough to break causation chain. Chain not broken if:
o Injury inflicted by D is still an operating and substantial cause of death.
o Vs death is result of act that is a foreseeable consequence of Ds actions.
o D doesnt take V as found.
Things that can break the chain of causation:
o Act of a third party.
o Vs own act.
o A natural but unpredictable event.
Medical treatment and causation
Unlikely to break chain unless it is so independent of Ds actions and in itself so
potent in causing death that Ds actions are insignificant:
o Smith 1959- two soldiers fought; one stabbed in lung. Dropped on way to
hospital and given treatment by doctor that may have worsened injury.
Original attacked guilty of murder- wound still operating.
o Cheshire 1991- D shot V. V given tracheotomy but died from complications.
Ds act still contributed to death, so no break in chain.
o Jordan 1956- D stabbed V. V had almost recovered when given antibiotics he
was allergic to. Suffered reaction and died. Chain broken; D not guilty.
Life-support machines- switching off of these by a doctor when patient is declared
brain-dead does not break the chain of causation.
o R v Malcherek; Steel 1981- D stabbed wife. V put on life-support, which was
turned off. D guilty, no break in chain.
o R v Mellor 1996- 71yr old V injured. Died in hospital- jury dont have to show
that medical intervention wasnt cause of death.
Problems with causation
What does more than a slight and trifling link mean? Vague; juries apply standards.
Thin-skull rule- unfair if D unaware of medical condition? Intent?
Should D be liable if life-saving treatment is refused by V?
Problems surrounding negligent medical treatment.
4
Reforms
Smith test altered to Cheshire test.
Thin-skull rule- reluctant to allow people to escape liability.
Allowance for doctors switching off life-support machines.
Accelerated principleo Adams 1957- doctor compassionately gave overdose to patient, who otherwise
wouldve died a painful death. Murder charge; had shortened life.