THE ELEMENTS OF CRIME
Before a man
can be convicted of a crime it is usually necessary for the prosecution to
prove;
(a) that a
certain event or a certain state of affairs, which is forbidden by the criminal law has been caused by his conduct
(b) that his
conduct was accompanied by a prescribed state of mind. The event or state of
affairs is usually called the actus reus and the state of mind is the men's rea of the crime. Both these elements must be proved beyond reasonable doubt by the
prosecution.
It is not always possible to separate actus reus from mens rea. Sometimes a word that describes the actus reus, or part of it,
Implies a mental element. Without that mental element, the actus reus simply cannot exist.
N1.NATURE OF ACTUS REUS
Since the actus reus include all the elements in the definition
Of the crime except for the accused’s mental element, it follows that the
actus reus is not merely an act. It may indeed consist in a “state of affairs”,
not including an act at all. Much more often, the actus reus requires proof of
an act or an omission. Usually, it must be proved that the conduct had a
particular result.
Example:
In murder, it must
be shown that the accused’s conduct causes the death.
The actus reus then is made up, generally but not invariably, of conduct
and sometimes its consequences and also of the circumstances in which the conduct takes place in so far as they are relevant. Circumstances, like
consequences, are relevant in so far as they are included in the definition of
the crime.
2. An Actus Reus must be proved.
Mens rea may exist without an actus reus but if there is no actus reus
there can be no crime.
Example:
Although D believes that he is
appropriating P’s property he cannot in any circumstances be guilty of theft if
the property belongs to no one. D has the mens rea but the actus reus, another fundamental element of the crime, is lacking.
A doctrine of actus reus which says that such a course must be wrong, as
contravening a fundamental principle is much too constricting .whether the defense
should consist simply in the external facts, or in the facts plus the state of
mind is a matter of policy, and it was a not unreasonable decision of policy
to say that a man who deliberately shot another should be guilty of an offense
unless he knew of circumstances justifying his conduct.
3. Analysis of an Actus Reus
“An act” is nothing more than a willed muscular movement
For example, the deliberate crooking of the finger.
But if D crooked his finger around the trigger of a loaded pistol
which was pointing at P, with the result that P was killed, to say “D crooked
his finger” would be a most misleading way of describing D’s “act”.
This example shows that omissions may entail liability for
“result” crimes as well as “conduct” crimes.
A result may be said to be caused by an omission if action by
D prevented its occurrence.