Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Is There Any Rational Basis for the Distinction Which Criminal Law Draws Between Acts and Omissions? How consistently is the Distinction Maintained?
Member rating:
(1 vote)
| Words:
| Submitted: Mon Jun 19 2006
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
2. Is There Any Rational Basis for the Distinction Which Criminal Law Draws Between Acts and Omissions? How consistently is the Distinction Maintained? An act is an action which directly or indirectly causes a result. In criminal law, a person is held liable for an action which, when the required mens rea1 and actus reus2 can jointly be proven to have caused harm to a person or property, unless they have a reasonable defence3. In contrast people are usually not convicted for their omissions: "it is evident that to punish men by law for not rendering to others all the service which it is their [moral] duty to render would be preposterous" 4. Making all moral omissions a crime would encompass too many people and would create an oppressive society5. An omission in law is where action is not taken which would prevent or reduce the risk of harm or damage to...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 147,038 others
Receive email updates for this category
- Simply tell us your email address and receive a weekly Study Help Email for FREE
- Receive 3 FREE essay views with each email
- Get all the latest essays from Coursework.Info & discussion from TheStudentRoom.co.uk
