The Principle of Causation in Criminal Law

📚 Previous Segment:

(a) Strict Liability Under the general principle of criminal law, mens rea (a guilty mind) is essential for establishing most crimes. However, in cases of strict liability, mens rea is not required. This means that the intention, belief, or state of mind of the accused is irrelevant.

The Principle of Causation in Criminal Law

Causation refers to the relationship between the accused's actions (or omissions) and the consequences of those actions. A person is considered to have caused an event if, but for their conduct, the event would not have occurred at the time and in the manner it did. In criminal law, when the actus reus of an offense involves specific consequences, it must be demonstrated that the accused caused the result. However, both actus reus (the physical element of the crime) and mens rea (the mental element) must coincide for criminal liability to be established. For example, if A shoots B intending to kill him but B was already deceased due to poisoning, A lacks the actus reus necessary for liability despite having the mens rea.

Series of Events and One Transaction

Sometimes, actus reus and mens rea may be spread across a series of events forming a single transaction. For instance, in Thambo Meli and Others v. The Queen (1954) W.L.R. 228, the accused attacked the victim, believing him to be dead, and later caused his actual death by exposing him to harmful conditions. The Privy Council upheld their conviction, emphasizing that their actions formed a continuous transaction, and mens rea could be inferred from the circumstances.

Key Circumstances in Causation

1. No Physical Participation: A person may be held liable even without direct involvement, such as by procuring, abetting, or inciting another to commit a crime. For example, someone who poisons a drink knowing another will offer it to the victim may be liable.

2. Indirect Participation: If an accused’s negligence leads another, acting innocently, to cause harm, the accused may still be liable. In R v. Low (1850) 3 C & K 123, an engineer left an untrained person in charge of machinery, resulting in a fatal accident, and was held responsible.

3. Subsisting and Supervening Causes:

• Subsisting Causes: Pre-existing factors that combine with the accused’s actions to cause harm do not break the chain of causation.
• Supervening Causes: Subsequent events may break the chain if they are unforeseeable or independent of the accused’s conduct. For example, if A wounds B and leaves him vulnerable, and B dies due to an expected intervening event (e.g., infection), A remains liable.

4. Victim’s Conduct: A victim’s refusal to mitigate harm does not absolve the accused. In R v. Holland (1841) 2 M & R 351, the victim’s refusal to amputate an injured finger led to death, but the court held the accused responsible.

5. Contributory Negligence: A victim’s negligence does not exonerate the accused in criminal cases, even though it might in civil matters.

6. Superfluous Participation: Intentional participation in a crime is not excused simply because the crime would have occurred without the accused's involvement. In R v. Macklin (1838) 2 Lew 225, participants in a mob attack were all convicted, regardless of whether their actions alone were fatal.

7. Unforeseen Consequences: Liability exists if the accused’s actions foreseeably lead to harm, even if the exact sequence of events was unexpected. For example, if the victim, frightened by the accused, takes a drastic action like jumping out of a window and dies, the accused may be liable.

Conclusion

The principles of actus reus and mens rea are fundamental to criminal liability, but strict application may allow offenders to escape justice. Courts have thus developed nuanced exceptions, reflecting society's evolving standards and needs. This balance ensures that criminal law remains effective and adaptable while upholding the core tenets of fairness and accountability. 

📖 Next Segment:

At common law, parties to a crime are categorized into four groups: Principal in the First Degree Principal in the Second Degree (Aider and Abettor) Accessory Before the Fact Accessory After the Fact