Criminal Law: Actus Reus and the Role of Automatism, Insanity, and Diminished Responsibility

Criminal Law

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
“Consider whether the criminal law now has the right balance when dealing with defendants who
have committed the actus reus of an offence but may have reduced or no culpability for the
actions”............................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................10
References......................................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
Generally, the commitment of the crime leads to the criminal offences by the person and the
court will impose the penalty or the prosecution on the person for such action. However there is a
chance, that the offender can mitigate the criminal liability, with this regards the automatism,
insanity and the diminished responsibility plays a significant role. The present study is based on
criminal activity associated with actusrea and the relationship of the same with the automatism,
insanity and the diminished responsibility. Further, in this study, it is also evaluated in what
circumstances the criminal liability on the person cannot be imposed by the court.
“CONSIDER WHETHER THE CRIMINAL LAW NOW HAS THE RIGHT
BALANCE WHEN DEALING WITH DEFENDANTS WHO HAVE
COMMITTED THE ACTUS REUS OF AN OFFENCE BUT MAY HAVE
REDUCED OR NO CULPABILITY FOR THE ACTIONS”
Actusreus is described as the external element or the objective element of a crime, which is the
Latin word for the "guilty act" which demonstrate a sensible doubt in mixture with the men'srea,
"guilty mind". It creates criminal liability in the common law-based criminal rule in accordance
with the law of England and Wales. In this approach, the conduct or behaviour can by
themselves be a criminal (Robinson, 2017). For instance, the behaviour of lying beneath promise
signifies the actusreus of lying under oath. In this, it is not important that whether the lie is
supposed or in condition had some consequence on the outcome of the situation, the actus Reus
of the offencecompletely dependupon the behaviour. The actusreus might relate to the
consequence of the proceedings or oversight of the defendant. The behaviour itself might not be

illegal, but the consequence of the demeanour possibly be a criminaloffence and same has been
cited in the case of (R v Larsonneur (1933) 24 Cr App R 74. Example throwing a stone is not a
crimehowever in case it strikes a person or broke a window it might sum to an
offence. Causation should be recognized in all such crimes (González-Tapia and Obsuth,
2015).
Infrequently an oversight can sum to the actusreus of a crime (Mitchell, 2017). Oversight or
failure to act usually carries no liabilities. The same implies that an individual will be considered
as criminal only when they have exercised an optimistic act. Further, to explain this example is
illustrated, individual A walking past a person B who was going on drown. Individual B could be
saved if individual A holds their hand. Moreover, individual in case A does not hold their hand
and person B drowns. In such a case individual A will not be liable legally.
However the universal rule concerning omissions is that there is no legal responsibility for a
stoppage to act. For example, in case an individual see a child jumping from the wall and still not
taking any action to save that child, in such case individual will not be liable for their inaction
despite how simple it might have been for them to secure the life of the child. The actusreus of a
crime can be grouped within one or several of three categories that are following:
 Conduct - The actusreus needs a convinced conduct
 Circumstantial - in which the actions are not criminal, but the situations are.
 Result - The actusreus necessitate a consequence.
A person can be protected from the crime if the conditions on the basis of which crime occurred
contradict the essential requirement of the crime. Here, Actusrea means the activities are
automatic, and the offender is not aware of the activities or behaviour which had led them