Students can avail opportunity to help them in their assignments, thesis, research

1. 1
Unit 5 – Crime I General Principles
By Ahmedi

2. 2
Table of Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 3
Task 1.............................................................................................................................................. 3
General and overriding principles of the criminal law................................................................ 3
The role and purpose of the criminal law in its social context.................................................... 4
Factors influence a change in the criminal law........................................................................... 5
Task 2.............................................................................................................................................. 5
Understand and explain the concept of Mens Rea ...................................................................... 5
Understand and explain the concept of the actus Reus ............................................................... 6
Interrelation between mens rea and actus rea.............................................................................. 7
Task 3.............................................................................................................................................. 8
Nature and concept of the defenses............................................................................................. 8
Recognize when issues of capacity arise and effect of capacity on crime .................................. 9
Task 4............................................................................................................................................ 10
Various modes of participation in crime ................................................................................... 10
Demonstrate an understanding of attempt, conspiracy and incitement..................................... 11
Demonstrate an understanding of aiding and abetting offenders and assisting and concealing
offences ..................................................................................................................................... 12
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 12
References..................................................................................................................................... 13

3. 3
Introduction
The body of law that relates with crime is called criminal law. The purpose of the criminal law is
to control the evils and social crimes in society and also give protection to the rights of the
others. This also helps to keep the peace in society. Under some lawful frameworks, for
occurrence, a manslaughter charge just applies to a homicide in which the culprit purposely and
readily dedicated the murdering.
Task 1
General and overriding principles of the criminal law
The crime is defined as,
“A "crime" is any act or omission (of an act) in violation of a public law forbidding or
commanding it.”
Any kind of the activity forbidden and restricted by law is called a crime. Criminal law includes
indictment by the legislature of a man for a demonstration that has been named a wrongdoing.
Common cases, then again, include people and associations trying to determine legitimate
debate. In a criminal case, the state, through a prosecutor, starts the suit, while in a common case
the casualty brings the suit. Persons declared guilty a wrongdoing may be detained, fined, or
both. In any case, persons discovered obligated in a common case might just need to surrender
property or pay cash, yet are not imprisoned.
R v Mohan [1975] 2 All ER 193
There are different levels of abstraction for analyzing and study of the criminal law. At the
lowest level, there are some specific rules that defines the crime of an individual like burglary,
robbery, larceny, manslaughter murder etc. on the other hand, a step eliminates from the
particular rules at higher level of abstraction known as criminal law doctrines.
For example, duress, necessity, excuse, insanity and attempts
The general principles that underlie and help criminal law are:

4. 4
1. Actus Reus (guilty act)
2. Mens Rea (Guilty mind)
3. Concurrence (of the actus Reus and mens rea)
4. Causation
5. Harm
The role and purpose of the criminal law in its social context
Generally the criminal laws come from four sources.
1. Case law:Established by previous court decisions and interpretations
2. Statutory law: Written law enacted by the elected local, state or national legislatures
3. Regulations set by government agencies: For example, each state regulates how to get a
driver’s license
4. Constitution: No state can create laws that go against the Constitution
In the light of the statement by Viscount Simonds in
Shaw v DPP [1962] AC 220 House of Lords
Criminal laws are made for the welfare of the state and the people. This helps to keep the
sovereignty of state and protects the civil and public rights of an individual. The main purpose is
safety of the people within a specific territory. Criminal laws are to control the bad effects and
harms on the society. Courts of law have residual power to enforce the supreme and basic
purpose of law.
The Criminal Law Act 1967, section 7(1)
The statement of Simonds helps to understand the importance and role of the criminal law in the
society. The social effects of these laws are positive on the people. However, some criminal
mind or negative behaviors cannot eliminate completely but can be controlled effectively.
The role and purpose of criminal laws are clearly in the statement of Simonds. The fundamental
purpose is the duty to guard against the attacks. The protection of the people is one of the basic
and main tasks of the management of state. There are different kinds of the punishments against
the crime. The purpose is to keep the peace and stop violence in society.

5. 5
Factors influence a change in the criminal law
Most unlawful acts are particularly counted in constitutions or statutes, and the procurement that
distinguishes the particular wrongdoing will likewise recognize the suitable discipline.
For example, a statute may read,
"Violation of this statute constitutes a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to exceed $500 or
imprisonment not to exceed 30 days, or both."
Given this scope of potential discipline, a judge will then consider certain "aggravating" or
"moderating" circumstances to figure out where along the endorsed range a specific criminal's
discipline ought to fall. In addition to this, the common factors influence a change in the criminal
law are the media and the way it portraits the criminal justice system. Technology, nature of the
offender, gender of the offender, constitutional law of state, offender is an accessory or not,
crime is committed under great personal stress or duress, offender is specifically cruel to a victim
or vindictive, destructive etc. these are some of the factors also put in consideration by judges. In
addition this, cognitive and behavioral elements also includes in influencing the criminal law.
For example, the capital sentence (death) is now banned in many countries because human rights
NGOs and social activists influence on this punishment. In some countries still death is a capital
punishment mostly in case of murder. This also observes that the crime ratio is increasing in
those countries where death as punishment is not more in practice. The reason is elimination of
fear of death from minds of people.
Task 2
Understand and explain the concept of Mens Rea
According to Legal Dictionary Mens Rea is defined as,
“An element of criminal responsibility, a guilty mind; a guilty or wrongful purpose; a criminal
intent, Guilty knowledge and willfulness”
According to fundamental principle of criminal law, a crime comprises of both a mental and a
physical component. Mens rea, a man's consciousness of the way that his or her direct is

6. 6
criminal, is the mental component, and actus reus, the demonstration itself, is the physical
component.
The idea of mens rea created in England amid the recent piece of the common law time (about
the year 1600) when judges started to hold that a demonstration alone couldn't make criminal
obligation unless it was joined by a blameworthy perspective. The level of mens rea needed for a
specific regular law wrongdoing fluctuated. Murder, for instance, obliged a noxious perspective,
though Larceny obliged a felonious perspective.
Morissette v. United States (1952)
In the context of the definition and explanation of the Mens Rea, we can say that Thomas
(School Teaching Assistant) had not criminal conspiracy in his mind. Moreover, he did not theft
the umbrella. However, he takes the umbrella with bone fide attention. He was fair in his act of
giving back umbrella to his real owner. Therefore, Thomas found not guilty in this case. In
relation to the umbrella, Thomas did not had the mens rea of any criminal offence even he left
the umbrella in ‘Desert Inn’.
However, the in ‘Desert Inn’ Thomas committed an offence. He damages an expensive shoe of
other customer while running towards bus. He might charge with the criminal damage and law of
torts under Negligence. The most suitable one is the case of Negligence because he was in hurry
and had no criminal attention or mens rea in his mind. However, elements of such offence have
been established.
Understand and explain the concept of the actus Reus
According to Duhaime’s Law Dictionary,
"Actus Reus The wrongful deed that comprises the physical components of a crime (and) such
result of human conduct as the law seeks to prevent."
This term was judicially considered in R v Theroux where Justice McLachlin in reference to the
actus reus:
"The offence has two elements: dishonest act and deprivation. The dishonest act is established by
proof of deceit, falsehood or 'other fraudulent means'. The element of deprivation is established

7. 7
by proof of detriment, prejudice, or risk of prejudice to the economic interests of the victim,
caused by the dishonest act."
In context of these definitions, Thomas also did not have any kind of actus rea. His actions and
deeds were not with attention of criminal damage or theft. However, in the hotel, he was not
taking right actions as due to his negligence he spoils an expensive shoe of customer because his
act of throwing wine in air was a deliberate act. Therefore, he committed the crime.
In relation to the magazine, it is hard to identify the attention of Thomas. There is possibility that
he approach to magazine to give it to his real owner not with aim of keeping it with him. On the
other hand, his reaction on approaching someone was because he had fear of not charging with
theft. However, mens rea and actus rea is not involve in all the cases. However, he has to pay the
damages because he left umbrella there due to negligence. Moreover, he threw wine in air. At
this movement there is no defense available for Thomas in show case.
The overall conclusion is that Thomas did not commit the theft in case of umbrella and magazine
therefore, he did not have actus rea.
Interrelation between mens rea and actus rea
Mens rea and Actus Reus are the two components of any crime with the amount of influence.
Actus Reus refers to the physical action of a crime, while mens rea refers to the intent and

8. 8
understanding of the criminal at the time of the crime. Actus Reus and mens rea help focus the
culpability of a criminal. While the Actus Reus figures out if a demonstration is unlawful, the
mens rea tries to characterize the level of good obligation. While the culprit slaughtering the
casualty is the actus Reus of the wrongdoing, it is the mens rea that may figure out if the
murdering is characterized as a crime, homicide, or unintentional demise.
In numerous criminal acts, the actus reus and mens rea don't convey equivalent weight. Some
criminal demonstrations, known as strict risk offenses, don't consider mens rea by any stretch of
the imagination. The relationship between actus reus and mens rea is not always this close in all
offenses. The prerequisite that charged do such breaking and entering with the expectation to
submit a lawful offense once inside. The commission of such a further crime is no some piece of
the actus reus of thievery, yet the aim to carry out such a further lawful offense is a piece of the
mens rea of robbery.
Leicester v Pearson (1952)
Task 3
Nature and concept of the defenses
In criminal law, there are numerous conditions that tend to negate the elements of a crime. This
trend of negating the elements is known as defenses. The accused may be assigned some of the
burden before the tribunal court. The burden of prove a crime is on the government where the
plaintiff is government. However, the defenses are available to everyone in many jurisdictions.
In addition, defenses are treated as the component of the crime. The defenses are available in
many cases for providing partial or total refuge from punishment.
Types of Defenses
Generally the types of defenses are as follows.
1. Insanity
2. Automatism
3. Intoxication
4. Mistake of fact

9. 9
5. Necessity/Lesser Harm
6. Self defense
7. Lawful Capacity of office
Harman and Gabriel has self defense. Gabriel has no criminal liability as he react in self defense.
On the other hand, Harman grab by Felix because they were insulting each other on supporting
of their teams. However, insanity and intoxication is defense available to the offender. In this
case Felix can use or provide with defenses of intoxication and insanity. However, burden of
proof is on Felix to prove that the act done by him was not in real and he was not in senses.
This case is of the assault and battery. Law of tort is applicable in this case. In addition to this,
some other customers also inspired. In simple words, this can say that there is kind of assault of
this fight on the others. The two other persons named Damien and Benjamin deliberately go for
fight. They can charge with criminal liability.
The relevant case law in context to the case of the Felix, Harman and Gabriel is
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
Recognize when issues of capacity arise and effect of capacity on crime
Capacity define by Merriam-webster Dictionary as,
“The capability and power under law of a person to occupy a particular status or relationship
with another or to engage in a particular undertaking or transaction”
The security of the individual and how to avoid further such occurrences happening is a
reasonable need. There may be contemplations, for example, whether the individual can keep on
living securely at home. Moreover, there is the possibility of future legitimate procedures, and
concerns, for example, the individual's ability to give proof, and whether they will have the
capacity to adapt to the weights of going to court. Comparable issues are additionally applicable
to more youthful individuals with genuine emotional sicknesses living in the group.
Out in the open strategy terms, this is the arrangement of parent’s patriae. So also, the state has
an immediate social and financial enthusiasm for advancing exchange, so it will characterize the
types of business venture that may work inside of its region, and set down decides that will

10. 10
permit both the organizations and those that wish to contract with them a reasonable chance to
pick up quality.
Task 4
Various modes of participation in crime
In the criminal law, then again, optional obligation has constrained application, mostly because
of the Charter, which precludes criminal risk and discipline on those people who are regarded in
charge of the activities of others on the premise the individual has no mens rea for the
wrongdoing or regularly no actus reus too. The participations are:
a) Liability
b) Presence at the scene of the crime
c) Participation by inactivity
d) Mens Rea of Secondary Parties
In addition to this there is another mode named Participation Pursuant to a Joint Enterprise. This
includes:
a) Accidental Departure from the common design
b) Deliberate Departure from the common design
c) Accomplices to murder
d) Repentance of secondary parties
e) Acquittal of the principal offender
Federico was present at the scene of the crime. However, his participating mode was
“participation by inactivity”. Therefore, he was liable as the criminal and being charged for the
criminal conspiracy. Mens rea was present but there was no actus reus.
Race Relations Board v Applin [1973] HL
On the other hand, the act of the Paul and Anthony was under Participation Pursuant to a Joint
Enterprise. Both are deliberately departure to stop the Edward who then accidently murder. Both
are equally charged with the murder because there is actusReus to stab him.

11. 11
Demonstrate an understanding of attempt, conspiracy and incitement
Attempt
“An undertaking to do an act that entails more than mere preparation but does not result in the
successful completion of the act.”
In Criminal Law, an endeavor to perpetrate a wrongdoing is an offense when a denounced
attempts to carry out a wrongdoing. The components of endeavor differ, albeit for the most part,
there must be an expectation to perpetrate the wrongdoing, an Overt Act past negligible
readiness, and a clear capacity to finish the wrongdoing.
Conspiracy
It is defined as,
“An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or
an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors.”
Conspiracy is represented by statute in government courts and most state courts. Prior to its
Codification in state and government statutes, the wrongdoing of connivance was essentially
consent to participate in an unlawful demonstration with the purpose to complete the
demonstration. Intrigue is a wrongdoing separate from the criminal represent which it is
produced. For instance, one who plots with another to submit Burglary and actually confers the
robbery can be accused of both scheme to confer theft and thievery.
NCB v Gamble [1959] 1 QB 11
This case law is relevant to situation of Federico because he was present at the crime scene. He
once agreed to this criminal conspiracy but later he did not denied to take part.
Incitement
Actuation was an offense under the basic law of England and Wales. It was an inchoate offense.
It comprised of influencing, empowering, prompting, compelling, or undermining to bring about
another to carry out a wrongdoing. One of the intriguing parts of prompting is that the
substantive offense does not oblige a man to follow up on the impelling, yet rather, an endeavor

12. 12
to actuate is adequate. With the goal affectation should be demonstrated, the onus is on the
indictment to demonstrate that there was prompting to confer an offense.
Invicta Plastics Ltd v Clare (1976) QBD
Benedict and Federico made a criminal conspiracy and attempted to blow up airport with
explosives.
Demonstrate an understanding of aiding and abetting offenders and assisting and
concealing offences
A criminal charge of aiding and abetting or adornment can as a rule is brought against any
individual who helps in the commission of a wrongdoing, however lawful refinements shift by
state. A man accused of helping and abetting or frill is normally not exhibit when the
wrongdoing itself is carried out, but rather he or she has information of the wrongdoing before or
sometime later, and may help with its bonus through counsel, activities, or money related
backing. Contingent upon the level of inclusion, the guilty party's support in the wrongdoing
may ascend to the level of intrigue. Paul aided the Anthony to catch Edward for the recovery of
the theft things.
R v Williams [2011] 1 WLR 588
Case law is relevant in case of the Anthony and Paul. In normal course, cricket bat is not used as
weapon however, this is an accident therefore, Anthony is charged with murder but not with
strict liability.
For Example, Andy draws a story arrangement of a bank, knowing of Dan's expectation to
ransack it. After Dan submits the burglary, Alice consents to give him a chance to store the
stolen cash at her home. Both Andy and Alice can be accused of aiding and abetting, or going
about as assistants to the theft.
Conclusion
Consideration of a man is essential in the criminal movement. Blameworthy action does not
exhibit that liable personality of a man. In this manner, it is important to watch that the brain is
likewise liable. Furthermore, a percentage of the unlawful acts affront in self guards

13. 13
References
1. R v Mohan [1975] 2 All ER 193
2. Shaw v DPP [1962] AC 220 House of Lords
3. The Criminal Law Act 1967, section 7(1)
4. Morissette v. United States (1952)
5. Leicester v Pearson (1952)
6. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
7. Race Relations Board v Applin [1973] HL
8. NCB v Gamble [1959] 1 QB 11
9. Invicta Plastics Ltd v Clare (1976) QBD
10. R v Williams [2011] 1 WLR 588