Actus Reus (Omissions)

4511 Words19 Pages
‘Critically analyse the situations where a person can be liable in criminal law for an omission to act’ One of the fundamental principles of criminal law is that ‘actus reus’ (the action) plus ‘mens rea’ (the intention of committing the act) must lead to a guilty verdict. Taking ‘actus reus’ as a side thought, the act must be positive and voluntary (e.g. I must voluntarily hit you to be convicted of battery). Although this is used as a guideline for finding defendants guilty or not guilty, there are certain situations in English law where a person may be liable to be prosecuted through an omission (a failure to act). This becomes confusing as there are certain scenarios (otherwise known as ‘duty situations’ as there is a duty of care attached to the individual who has omitted to do something) where you can be found guilty on terms of an omission and other conditions wherein you can omit but still not be guilty of an offence. With this in mind, it is important to distinguish between whether the omission was indeed attached to a duty of care or not. In this essay, I will explore that although it is possible to be found guilty on terms of omissions; it is a very daunting and perplexing process and requires careful consideration by any court of law before any sentence is decided. Duty situations are simply circumstances where a person has a legal duty to act, even if the action could be classed as an omission- for example, if I was to have a child and not feed them, I will be found guilty of failing my duties as a parent (although I did not necessarily act). These duty situations are precedents that are used when looking at cases that would not necessarily link to an Act of Parliament, but are definitely not just straight-forward omissions. The situations where you would be liable to act by these set out precedents are: public office; contract; statutory/’state of

More about Actus Reus (Omissions)

Open Document