A criminal offence consists of 2 basic elements: actus reus and mens rea. Actus reus = the guilty act (conduct) Mens rea = the mental mind (mental state) Theft: dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of the property. On is guilty of theft only if both his conduct and mental state satisfy the requirements of the actus reus and mens rea of theft. Function of Criminal Law: Definition of a crime: A crime or criminal offence is a legal wrong and the wrongdoer who committed the crime may be punished according to legal procedure. A criminal offence can only be created by the Legislative Council through enactment of legislation and sanctions are stipulated by statute. Process: investigation, prosecution, trial of a criminal offence, appeal against the court's findings One must be proven guilty of a crime that he possesses every element: criminal act (actus reus) + requisite state of mind (mens rea) + causation + concurrence (of Act and State of Mind) If the prosecution is unable to prove all of the elements, there can be no conviction. Before he may be convicted of a crime, the prosecution must show that the person committed an act prohibited by some law, or failed to act when he had a legal obligation or duty to do so. This principle is referred to as the actus reus. The law does not punish mere criminal thoughts, nor does it punish a person for his status. As a rule, legal liability is typically based upon an affirmative physical act by the person charged, but in some instances liability can rest upon a failure to act, if it is determined that a person had a legal obligation to act under the circumstances. The act or the conduct may consist of the physical movement of a person, such as pulling the trigger of a gun or breaking into a house to commit theft, or it may consist of verbal acts that induce fear in a victim. Possession can also form the basis of criminal liability even though it does not seem like an act, as long as the prosecutor can prove that the defendant knowingly had custody or control over the contraband. Criminal act requirement: (a) Voluntary Act The act must be voluntary. Examples to be excluded: epileptic seizures while driving and kill innocent bystanders or spasms, reflexive actions, or
actions while sleepwalking or in some other form of unconscious state.
The acts carried out by the sleepwalker are held to be not voluntary for purposes of criminal liability because the action is not under the volition of the actor, the first element of the crime (a voluntary act) is missing. Other examples: hypnosis or brainwashing (the wills of these people have been compromised by some form of mind control). (b)Act vs Status The criminal law does not punish thoughts, emotions, personality or character. However, statutes prohibit being in public while drunk was held to be constitutional. (c) Possession Mere possession of property often involves no physical action to gain control of the contraband item. Mere possession was not a crime because no act was involved. The rationale is that the act requirement is complied with because the defendant either actively procured or received the items, or violated the legally imposed duty to divest himself of control as soon as possible upon discovering the illegal nature of the possession. Therefore, possession crimes might be considered crimes of omission because the individual did not divest themselves of contraband once they had knowledge, and this omission created criminal cuplability. In order to be convicted of a crime, the accused must have committed a criminal act (or omission). The act may involve an actual physical movement, or it may consist of verbal acts. One cannot be punished for evil intent alone, nor for any status (such as being an addict or an alcoholic). When criminal liability is based upon the defendant's affirmative act, there usually must be a showing that he made some conscious movement, gowever, possession crimes have been upheld even if there is no proof of a conscious movement related to the contraband. Criminal Omission: Though in the usual case an affirmative act is required for criminal culpability, in some instances, liability can rest on the failure to act. This is referred to as criminal omission, acts of omission, or in some instances, failure to act. There are many statutes that make failure to act a violation of the law, e.g. failure to register for the draft or failure to prepare income tax returns. Although the cases concerning failure to act generally arise in homicide cases in which the defendant's conviction is predicated on the theory that the defendant failed to take steps to save the victim's life, the rationale also applies in other cases. The rule is that the defendant's omission will support a finding of criminal liability when it is shown that he was under a legal duty to act and that it would have been possible for him to act. In Jones v United States, the court held that a person who failed to act may be found guilty of homicide, if there existed a duty, e.g. where a statute imposes a ditu to care for another; where one stands in a certain status relationship to another; where one has assumed a contractual duty to care for another; and where one has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent the others from rendering aid. FAILURE TO RENDER ASSISTANCE MURDER