WJEC/Eduqas A Level Law: Book 1 Revision Guide

Chapter 4 Criminal law • Presumption can be rebutted by considering four factors: • Is the offence regulatory in nature or a true crime? Sweet v Parsley (1970) • Does the offence relate to an issue of social concern? Harrow London Borough Council v Shah (1999) • Did Parliament intend to create an offence of strict liability by using certain words in a statute? Mens rea words include: intentionally, knowingly. Non mens rea words include: possession, cause: Alphacell v Woodward (1972) and Cundy v Le Cocq (1884) • The gravity of the punishment: Callow v Tillstone (1900) ; Gammon (HK) Ltd v Attorney General (1985) • Advantages: • Time and cost of proving mens rea; Protection of society by promoting a higher standard of care; The ease of imposing strict liability acts as a deterrent; Proportionality of the punishment appropriate for strict liability • Disadvantages: • Possibility of injustice; Role of judges in interpreting statutes can lead to inconsistency in judicial decisions; Is strict liability actually a deterrent due to the small penalties involved?; Does strict liability breach the European Convention on Human Rights ? R v G (2008) • Proposals for reform Activity 4.6 General elements of crime Fill in the missing words from the list provided to complete the paragraphs. In a criminal case, the burden of proving guilt is on the . The standard to which they need to prove this guilt is ‘ reasonable ‘. The standard of proof is higher in a criminal case than a one as the impact of being found guilty of a criminal offence is much greater. It also supports the principle of ‘ until proven guilty ’ and Article 6 (right to a fair ). There are generally two elements required for the commission of a criminal offence: actus reus (the guilty ) and rea (the mind). The general is that a defendant must have committed a guilty act while having a guilty state of mind. This supports the Latin tenet: actus non reum nisi mens rea , which means the act does not make a person guilty unless the is also guilty. Once this is established, causation then needs to be proved which looks at the between the result and the conduct of the defendant. Often referred to as a ‘ of causation ’ it connects the actus reus and the corresponding . For there to be criminal liability, there must be an unbroken chain of causation. Words to use act beyond chain civil doubt ECHR facit guilty innocent link mens mind presumption prosecution result sit trial 148