TOPIC 1: CRIMINALISATION
1. What are the SIX definitions of crime?
1. Blackletter definition (is a violation of the law, so law is the formal cause of crime
2. Crime is antisocial deviation from some social/moral code which causes social harm
3. Is a social construct created through society’s perceptions, reactions and definitions
4. Is political censure utilised by powerful groups to divert attention away and immunise
themselves
5. Is a historical invention based on Puritan views of sin but developing when primary
concern became protection of property
6. Doesn’t have a universal definition but rather several different ones, e.g. a moral
definition, a procedural definition, a political definition, etc.
2. What’s the preventative turn? (1)
More inchoate offences have been created instead of focusing on autonomy, which justifies
authoritarianism and the control and expansion of penal states
3. What are the THREE principles of criminal law?
1. Principle of minimal criminalisation to maintain integrity of censure
2. Principle of proportionality to balance extent of interference with rights
3. Principle of fair-labelling to consider perpetrator’s state of mind
4. Why is there no Criminal Code in English law? (3)
Are around 10-12K criminal offences in England and Wales; would be simpler if all criminal
offences were included in one Criminal Code.
It would improve accessibility, certainty, efficiency, modernity and consistency.
However, creating a Criminal Code was abandoned in 2008 as it was decided the benefits were
emphasised, and it wasn’t popular.
5. What are FIVE difficulties with criminalising human activity?
1. There’s no public consensus on what’s criminal (e.g. Devlin thinks homosexuality should
be criminalised to protect society’s shared morality, but Hart disagrees)
2. There are conflicting moral interests (e.g. sadomasochism vs consent)
3. Justified by Mill’s harm principle, but what societal harm is can be disputed
4. Doesn’t focus enough on the victim’s experience and can criminalise them
5. Are clear sex, race and class biases when it comes to convictions
,TOPIC 2: PUNISHMENT
1. What is Flew’s definition of punishment? (5)
Is unpleasant, for an offence, to an offender, by the state according to the law, and intentional.
2. How can punishment be consequentially justified? (1)
Justifies punishment when the good it brings about outweighs the pain it inflicts (e.g. deterrence,
rehabilitation and incapacitation).
3. What are FIVE problems with consequentialism?
1. Leads to excessive punishment
2. Justifies punishing the innocent
3. Uses people as a means to an end
4. Makes unwarranted assumptions e.g. about the success of deterrence
5. Causes collateral damage
4. How can punishment be deontologically justified? (1)
Justifies punishment when it responds to the seriousness of the crime and the defendant’s
blameworthiness (e.g. retributivism and just deserts).
5. What are TWO problems with deontology?
1. Doesn’t fully acknowledge the defendant’s responsibility by using a scale of punishment
2. Isn’t always practical or effective
6. What are FIVE reasons for punishing people?
1. To maintain a social order
2. To regulate and control an increasingly complex society
3. To suppress threats
4. To organise and incentivise labour
5. To control public expressions of violence
, TOPIC 3: ACTUS REUS
1. What is the actus reus of an offence? (2)
Is the conduct element or the ‘guilty act’.
Can be the actual act, its consequences, the circumstances surrounding it, or a combination of
these things.
2. What are FOUR reasons that the actus reus needs to be voluntary?
1. Doesn’t punish involuntary acts
2. Limits government’s power (e.g. to punish thoughts)
3. Only punishes those acts which create social harm
4. Values autonomy and responsibility
3. What are THREE circumstances where there can be criminal liability for an omission?
1. When established by statute (e.g. Road Traffic Act 1998; have to use breathalyzer)
2. When creating a dangerous situation (seen in R v Miller)
3. When responsibility has been assumed (seen in R v Evans)
4. What are FOUR problems with criminalising omissions?
1. Responsibility can be socially or economically coerced (e.g. woman assumed
responsibility as women are often primary caregivers in R v Stone; R v Dobinson)
2. Factual causation doesn’t always apply with omissions
3. Punishes one’s character instead of their actions
4. Act/omission distinction isn’t always clear (seen in Airedale NHS Trust v Bland)
5. What is factual causation? (1)
Established in R v White as the consequence not occurring but for the defendant’s act/omission.
6. What is legal causation? (2)
Is where the defendant’s act/omission is a substantial (significant contribution) and operating (not
too remote) cause of the consequence.
Was seen in R v Mitchell that this doesn’t need to be direct.
7. What is a novus actus interveniens? (4)
Is a free, voluntary, informed and unreasonable act which breaks the chain of causation, as seen in
R v Kennedy.
1. What are the SIX definitions of crime?
1. Blackletter definition (is a violation of the law, so law is the formal cause of crime
2. Crime is antisocial deviation from some social/moral code which causes social harm
3. Is a social construct created through society’s perceptions, reactions and definitions
4. Is political censure utilised by powerful groups to divert attention away and immunise
themselves
5. Is a historical invention based on Puritan views of sin but developing when primary
concern became protection of property
6. Doesn’t have a universal definition but rather several different ones, e.g. a moral
definition, a procedural definition, a political definition, etc.
2. What’s the preventative turn? (1)
More inchoate offences have been created instead of focusing on autonomy, which justifies
authoritarianism and the control and expansion of penal states
3. What are the THREE principles of criminal law?
1. Principle of minimal criminalisation to maintain integrity of censure
2. Principle of proportionality to balance extent of interference with rights
3. Principle of fair-labelling to consider perpetrator’s state of mind
4. Why is there no Criminal Code in English law? (3)
Are around 10-12K criminal offences in England and Wales; would be simpler if all criminal
offences were included in one Criminal Code.
It would improve accessibility, certainty, efficiency, modernity and consistency.
However, creating a Criminal Code was abandoned in 2008 as it was decided the benefits were
emphasised, and it wasn’t popular.
5. What are FIVE difficulties with criminalising human activity?
1. There’s no public consensus on what’s criminal (e.g. Devlin thinks homosexuality should
be criminalised to protect society’s shared morality, but Hart disagrees)
2. There are conflicting moral interests (e.g. sadomasochism vs consent)
3. Justified by Mill’s harm principle, but what societal harm is can be disputed
4. Doesn’t focus enough on the victim’s experience and can criminalise them
5. Are clear sex, race and class biases when it comes to convictions
,TOPIC 2: PUNISHMENT
1. What is Flew’s definition of punishment? (5)
Is unpleasant, for an offence, to an offender, by the state according to the law, and intentional.
2. How can punishment be consequentially justified? (1)
Justifies punishment when the good it brings about outweighs the pain it inflicts (e.g. deterrence,
rehabilitation and incapacitation).
3. What are FIVE problems with consequentialism?
1. Leads to excessive punishment
2. Justifies punishing the innocent
3. Uses people as a means to an end
4. Makes unwarranted assumptions e.g. about the success of deterrence
5. Causes collateral damage
4. How can punishment be deontologically justified? (1)
Justifies punishment when it responds to the seriousness of the crime and the defendant’s
blameworthiness (e.g. retributivism and just deserts).
5. What are TWO problems with deontology?
1. Doesn’t fully acknowledge the defendant’s responsibility by using a scale of punishment
2. Isn’t always practical or effective
6. What are FIVE reasons for punishing people?
1. To maintain a social order
2. To regulate and control an increasingly complex society
3. To suppress threats
4. To organise and incentivise labour
5. To control public expressions of violence
, TOPIC 3: ACTUS REUS
1. What is the actus reus of an offence? (2)
Is the conduct element or the ‘guilty act’.
Can be the actual act, its consequences, the circumstances surrounding it, or a combination of
these things.
2. What are FOUR reasons that the actus reus needs to be voluntary?
1. Doesn’t punish involuntary acts
2. Limits government’s power (e.g. to punish thoughts)
3. Only punishes those acts which create social harm
4. Values autonomy and responsibility
3. What are THREE circumstances where there can be criminal liability for an omission?
1. When established by statute (e.g. Road Traffic Act 1998; have to use breathalyzer)
2. When creating a dangerous situation (seen in R v Miller)
3. When responsibility has been assumed (seen in R v Evans)
4. What are FOUR problems with criminalising omissions?
1. Responsibility can be socially or economically coerced (e.g. woman assumed
responsibility as women are often primary caregivers in R v Stone; R v Dobinson)
2. Factual causation doesn’t always apply with omissions
3. Punishes one’s character instead of their actions
4. Act/omission distinction isn’t always clear (seen in Airedale NHS Trust v Bland)
5. What is factual causation? (1)
Established in R v White as the consequence not occurring but for the defendant’s act/omission.
6. What is legal causation? (2)
Is where the defendant’s act/omission is a substantial (significant contribution) and operating (not
too remote) cause of the consequence.
Was seen in R v Mitchell that this doesn’t need to be direct.
7. What is a novus actus interveniens? (4)
Is a free, voluntary, informed and unreasonable act which breaks the chain of causation, as seen in
R v Kennedy.
