Mens rea and actus reus

• actus reus and mens rea have to coincide
• concept of continuing act ("omission" actually a positive, continuous act)

case of driving on the policeman's foot

same as R v Kaitamaki

AR and MR have to coincide

• rape case
• penetration was a continnuing act
• when D realized his V did not consent (MR element) the actus reus was still in progress

same as Fagan v MPC

series of act= one transaction

• beat him up, thought he was dead and threw him off a cliff
• not separate acts, but a single transaction
• MR and AR coincided for the purposes of law

same as R v Church

• thought he had killed V and threw her body into the river
• "series of acts"

same as R v Thabo Meli

assault and eventual act causing death were part of the same continuous act= manslaughter

• same as R v Kaitamaki
• Fagan v MPC

Recklessness

mens rea= can be recklessness: taking a known risk of causing the damage, must intend or foresee the consequences

a defendant must be shown to have subjectively appreciated a risk to the health or property of another but carried on in any event before they may be said to be criminally culpable

abolished "objective recklessness" test in R v Caldwell

• doli incapax= conclusive presumption that a child under 10 cannot be criminally responsible
• old common law rule= till age 14, applied here

section 34 of Crime and Disorder Act 1988= abolished the presumption of doli incapax for children betweenn 10 and 14

child found guilty