Skip to main content
United States
Jump To
Support
Register or Log In
Support
Register or Log In
Instructors
Browse Products
Getting Started
Students
Browse Products
Getting Started
Return to Subject Area Student Resources for Criminal Law
Self-test questions: Actus Reus
Quiz Content
*
not completed
.
Jamal is walking on the canal path and sees Usha drowning in the canal. Usha is a teenager who lives in Jamal's neighbourhood. Jamal has seen Usha in the local shop before but has never spoken to Usha. What is the law on omissions that applies to Jamal's situation?
Jamal must try to rescue Usha because he recognises who Usha is and accordingly has a duty to act.
correct
incorrect
Jamal must call emergency services because he has a duty to act arising from the 'neighbour' principle.
correct
incorrect
Jamal has no duty to act and commits no offence should he watch Usha drown.
correct
incorrect
Jamal has no duty to act and commits no offence should he push Usha away from the canal bank, preventing her from saving herself.
correct
incorrect
Jamal must try to rescue Usha because Jamal has a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent death under a contractual obligation as he works as a chef.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Which of the following offences is an example of a conduct crime?
Murder (Coke 3 Inst 47):
Murder is when a person of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature
in rerum natura
under the king's peace, with malice aforethought
correct
incorrect
Robbery (s. 8(1) Theft Act 1968):
A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.
correct
incorrect
Malicious wounding (s. 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861):
Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously wound or inflict any grievous bodily harm upon any other person, either with or without any weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of an offence.
correct
incorrect
Blackmail (s. 21(1) Theft Act 1968):
A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for him/herself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces.
correct
incorrect
Administering a noxious substance to endanger life (s. 23 Offences Against the Person Act 1861):
Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously administer to or cause to be administered to or taken by any other person any poison or other destructive or noxious thing, so as thereby to endanger the life of such person.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In general, all criminal offences require proof of voluntary conduct on the part of D. Which of the following answers is accurate?
The statement is true, because in general, the criminal act must be a positive act. See
Hill v Baxter
.
correct
incorrect
The statement is false, because an automaton always incurs criminal liability. See
Bratty v AG for Northern Ireland.
correct
incorrect
The statement is true and false because both have been held as
ratio decidendi.
correct
incorrect
The statement is neither True of False.
correct
incorrect
The statement is false, because criminal liability is often determined by proof of an involuntary act.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Olive is standing next to Bill who is annoying Gertrude. Without anticipating that Bill would do such a thing, Olive finds that Bill has taken her arm and is using it to hit Gertrude in the chest. Olive is unable to break free from Bill's grip. According to the relevant principles governing the actus reus of offences, which of the following statements is the most accurate?
Olive has committed a crime of battery, as her action is voluntary.
correct
incorrect
Olive has committed no crime, as her action is involuntary.
correct
incorrect
Olive has committed a crime of battery. It is irrelevant that Bill forces her to hit Gertrude.
correct
incorrect
Olive has committed a crime, because she should have expected Bill to have done as he did.
correct
incorrect
Olive has committed no crime, because Gertrude could have retreated in time before Olive's arm hit her in the chest.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Arnie placed a small amount of poison into Valerie's coffee when they met in the local coffee shop. Arnie was jealous that Valerie had so many more social media followers than he did, and wanted Valerie to die. After taking a small sip of the coffee, Valerie collapsed and died. The post mortem revealed that an undiagnosed heart problem caused Valerie's death. According to relevant principles of actus reus, which of the following statements is most accurate?
Following
R v White
Arnie is not liable for any offence in respect of Valerie's death as his actions were not a factual cause of her death.
correct
incorrect
Following
R v White
Arnie is not liable for any offence in respect of Valerie's death as his actions were not a legal cause of her death.
correct
incorrect
Following
R v Miller
Arnie is not liable for Valerie's death because his actions did not amount to a factual cause of death.
correct
incorrect
Following
R v Miller
Arnie is liable for the attempted murder of Valerie because his actions did not amount to a factual cause of death.
correct
incorrect
Following
R v White
Arnie is liable for the attempted murder of Valerie because his actions did not amount to a factual cause of death.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Jed broke Seth's leg at a Sunday football match. Leroy called an ambulance. However, Phil the driver stopped by his lover's house for an hour before going to the scene. When Phil did arrive, Seth appeared to be well, except for his broken leg. However, fat tissue from bone marrow had leaked into Seth's blood stream, causing a fatal seizure two days later. According to the causation principles, which of the following statements is most likely to be accurate?
Jed can be the cause of Seth's death, because the ambulance delay broke the legal chain of causation.
correct
incorrect
Jed cannot be the cause of Seth's death, because he is not a factual cause of the harm.
correct
incorrect
Phil cannot be the cause of Seth's death, because he is not a factual cause of the harm.
correct
incorrect
Jed and Phil can be the cause of Seth's death, as they may both be deemed factual and legal causes of the harm.
correct
incorrect
Jed must be the sole cause of Seth's death, as poor medical treatment can never break the legal chain of causation.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Which of the following scenarios would
not
result in criminal liability according to the criminal law on omission?
Gregory watches a child that he does not know walk into a road with fast moving traffic to see what will happen. The child is run over and suffers extensive injuries.
correct
incorrect
Taybah is aware she drove into a pedestrian as she was driving but did not stop.
correct
incorrect
Joy sets fire to her neighbour's fence when she uses her outdoor barbeque grill. She ignores it, and the whole fence burns down and causes fire damage to the neighbour's summer house.
correct
incorrect
James watches his son Sam, aged two, fall into a lake and does not help him. Sam drowns.
correct
incorrect
Kelsey is a carer of Leigh, who is blind. Kelsey watches Leigh walk of the edge of a cliff whilst she is on duty.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Marjory shoots Mavis in the leg at the local Women's Institute meeting, when invited to practice shooting with an expert. Mavis loses a lot of blood and undergoes an essential operation. Unfortunately, Seamis, the anaesthetist, is extremely tired and does not notice that the breathing tube is not working properly. Mavis dies during the operation, because of the lack of oxygen she receives during the operation. Which of the following statements most accurately applies to Marjory or Seamis' liability according to the principles of causation?
According to
R v White
Marjory would not be a factual cause of Mavis' death, because she would have died regardless of Marjory's actions.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Blaue
Marjory would not be a legal cause of Mavis' death, because she would have to take the victim as she found her.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Cheshire
Marjory would be the legal cause of death because the legal chain of causation is not broken by Seamis, as the injury caused by Marjory is operating on Mavis at the time of death.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Jordan
Marjory would be the legal cause of Mavis' death because the legal chain of causation is broken by 'palpably wrong' medical treatment, which occurs when the initial injury has become history.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Roberts
Marjory's actions and Seamis' omission would not be legal causes of Mavis' death, because her decision to take part in the shooting practice was so 'daft' that it could not be reasonably foreseen as something she would do.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
What does actus reus refer to in criminal law?
The guilty mind—what D was thinking at the time of the offence.
correct
incorrect
The physical element of the offence—the prohibited conduct or omission that D has done.
correct
incorrect
Omission—D may commit an offence by their failure to act.
correct
incorrect
Causation—what the result of D's actions were.
correct
incorrect
The physical and mental element of the offence—the prohibited conduct and what D was thinking at the time of the offence.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Morris was homeless. He found the door of Alice's shed ajar and made himself comfortable for the night. He lit a candle and read a few pages of a book. At some point he fell asleep and was woken by his coughing. The shed was filled with smoke from a fire that had begun when he had knocked the candle over in his sleep. Which of the following statements most accurately reflects the law on criminal omissions that applies here?
According to
R v Miller
Morris will be guilty of no crime if he runs away from the shed and does nothing.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Miller
Morris will only be guilty of no crime if he attempts to put the fire out in every way he possibly can.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Miller
Morris will not be guilty of any crime whether he does something to stop the fire spreading or not, as he has no contractual duty to put out fires.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Miller
Morris will only be guilty of no crime if he calls for some help to stop the fire.
correct
incorrect
According to
R v Miller
Morris will not be guilty of any crime whether he does something to stop the fire spreading or not as he has no statutory duty to put out fires.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Josh argues with his brother Jason about which of them is the best surfer at the beach. Josh angrily pushes Jason, who falls and hits his head on a stone wedged into the sand. He is unconscious. Not wanting to be around when Jason gets up in case he retaliates, Josh leaves him on the beach. The tide comes in and Jason drowns. Consider which of the following statements most accurately addresses the issue of causation that applies here.
Josh is a factual cause but not a legal cause of Josh's death.
correct
incorrect
Josh is neither a factual or legal cause of Josh's death because the movement of the tide is not an extraordinary event.
correct
incorrect
Josh is both a factual and legal cause of Josh's death.
correct
incorrect
Josh is not a factual cause but is a legal cause of Josh's death.
correct
incorrect
Josh is not a factual or legal cause of Josh's death because they are related to each other.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Marsha is a student and shares a house with Norman. They are not friends, but Marsha has spoken to him, made him a cup of tea on several occasions, and has woken him up so he makes it to his lectures on time. One week, she realised that Norman had not spoken to her for several days and he had not left his room when she called him in the morning. She did not do anything about it. Eventually, Norman's mother came to the house, very concerned, as Norman had not responded to any of her texts for several days, which was highly unusual. When Marsha entered Norman's room with his mother, they found him in a comatose state and he needed hospitalisation. Consider which of the following statements is most accurate is relation to the general principles of actus reus?
Marsha cannot be criminally liable for failing to check that Norman was well because she voluntarily assumed responsibility for him following the case of
R v Stone and Dobinson.
correct
incorrect
Marsha can be criminally liable for failing to check that Norman was well because she voluntarily assumed responsibility for him following the case of
R v Stone and Dobinson
.
correct
incorrect
Marsha cannot be criminally liable for failing to check that Norman was well because she was not his relative following the case of
R v Hood.
correct
incorrect
Marsha can be criminally liable for failing to check that Norman was well because she created the situation he was in following the case of
R v Miller
.
correct
incorrect
Marsha cannot be criminally liable for failing to check that Norman was well because she was not contractually obligated to do anything.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Sol broke up with his girlfriend Eva one month ago and is very sad about it. He has been following her everywhere ever since. Her new boyfriend Gregory wants Sol to stop this behaviour and confronts him. A fight between the two of them occurs and Gregory breaks Sol's arm. Sol refused to seek any medical assistance, because he feels he is worthless and deserves the pain. Eventually he becomes very ill and dies. Had he sought medical treatment he would not have died. What is the most accurate statement that applies to this scenario in respect of causation principles?
Gregory is not a factual cause but is a legal cause of Sol's death, because he must take his victim as he found him, including his psychological make-up.
correct
incorrect
Gregory is a factual but not legal cause of Sol's death, because he must take his victim as he found him, including his psychological make-up.
correct
incorrect
Gregory is not a factual cause of Sol's death, because Gregory's actions were not a reasonably foreseeable response to Gregory's actions.
correct
incorrect
Gregory is not a factual cause of Sol's death, because Sol intended to commit suicide anyway.
correct
incorrect
Gregory is both a factual and legal cause of Gregory's death, because he must take his victim as he found him, including his psychological make-up.
correct
incorrect
Previous Question
Submit Quiz
Next Question
Reset
Exit Quiz
Review & Submit
Submit Quiz
Are you sure?
You have some unanswered questions. Do you really want to submit?
Back to top
Printed from , all rights reserved. © Oxford University Press, 2024
Select your Country