1. INTRODUCTION TO
CRIMINAL LAW
Lecture 6

2. Learning Outcomes:
Outline the elements of crime;
Understand the different degrees of intent;
Explain what is a strict liability offence;
Outline the burden and standard of proof in criminal law;
and
Be able to analyse case law and cite cases in a persuasive
manner in an answer.

3. What is a crime and how is it different from a tort?
Definition of crime: no universally accepted definition!
Lord Tucker 1957: “a crime is an unlawful act...which is an
offence against the public and renders the person guilty
of the act...liable to legal punishment”
Crime-Public Law; whereas tort falls under the Private (Civil)
Law
Remedies: Criminal Law-punishment
Tort-compensation (damages)

4. The elements of crime:
“Actus Reus”- the guilty act: it is the physical element
of the offence
“Mens Rea”- the guilty mind or intention: it is the
mental element of the offence
Each offence has its own actus reus and mens rea-this
will be examined in more detail when we look at the
different offences that will be studied on the course

5. Actus Reus
Actus reus is usually the act of committing an offence.
The physical act.
However, the actus reus of an offence can also be an
omission.
An omission is the failure to do something. For
example, the failure to stop at the traffic light or the
failure to wear a seat belt.

6. CHAIN OF CAUSATION
Chain of causation- there must be a casual link
between the D’s act/omission and the consequences
R v Lewis (1970)
R v Smith (1959)
R v Jordan (1956)

7. Mens Rea
 Different levels of mens rea are required for different crimes: for example, the
mens rea of murder differs from the mens rea of manslaughter
 Specific Intention: this is whereby the defendant has the intention/desire to
commit the crime and achieve the desired consequences of his actions. For
example, to cause the victim injury or to kill the victim.
 R v Mohan (1976)- Court of Appeal held that motive or reason of the defendant
for doing the act is not important
 Recklessness: here the defendant does not intend to commit the crime but acts in
such a reckless way that any reasonable person would realise that a crime would
be committed as a result. The defendant takes an unjustifiable risk, aware of the
danger that might result.

8. Strict Liability Offences
 No requirement to establish mens rea- the actus reus is enough to hold
the D guilty
 E.g., drink driving, failure to stop at the traffic light, selling alcohol to
anyone under the age of 18 years old etc.
 Winzar v Chief Constable for Kent (1983)
 Harrow Borough Council v Shah (1999)

9. What is the standard and burden of proof in criminal
law?
 Defendant is innocent until proven guilty
 Burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove beyond
reasonable ground that the defendant is guilty of the offence
 Burden of proof: who has to prove the defendant guilty of the offence
 The Prosecution
 Standard of proof: the test/what needs to be proven
 “prove beyond reasonable doubt” that the defendant is guilty of the
offence (Woolmington v DPP (1935))

10. “Beyond reasonable doubt”
There must not be any degree of “reasonable doubt”
What amounts to “reasonable doubt” ?
Almost saying that the judge/jury has to be absolutely certain
that the defendant is guilty/not guilty of the offence

11. However.........
The burden of proof will rest on the defence where for
example, the defendant, who has been charged with
murder ,raises the defence of diminished responsibility
 In this situation the defence will have to prove not on the
test of “beyond reasonable doubt” but a test based on a
“balance of possibilities”, that the defendant has a
defence

12. Preps. For Seminar 5
Hand Out
Reading:
 Jacqueline Martin, “GCSE Law”, 5th
edition, Chapter 21- Criminal
Law: introduction
List of Cases (on Hand Out)