Cases

Question 1

Poulton

Answer 1

The victim must have a completely independent existence from the mother

Question 2

Enoch

Answer 2

The victim must be fully expelled from the womb

Question 3

Pitwood

Answer 3

Contractual duty

Question 4

Statutory instrument

Answer 4

Children and young persons act 1933

Road traffic act 1988

Question 5

Dytham

Answer 5

Duty through ones official position

Question 6

Gibbons and proctor

Answer 6

Duty through a relationship

Question 7

Stone and dobbinson

Answer 7

Voluntary assumption of responsibility

Question 8

Miller

Answer 8

Defendant set in motion a chain of events

Question 9

Pagett

Answer 9

Gail would not have died but for the D using her for a human shield

Question 10

White

Answer 10

W’s mother would have died anyway but for him putting the poison in her tea

Question 11

Kimsey

Answer 11

D’s actions does not have to be wholly significant but be more than trivial

Question 12

Wood

Answer 12

The D became heavily drunk and went to the V’s house and fell asleep. He awoke to find the V performing oral sex on him so he beat the V with a meat cleaver and a hammer

LP: Alcohol Dependancy Syndrome can seen as an abnormality of mental functioning, but its for the jury to decide whether the amount the D consumed was enough but did not exceed the amount needed for the addition

Question 13

Byrne

Answer 13

D was a sexual psychopath who strangled a woman and mutilated her body. The medical evidence stated that due to his condition he was unable to control his perverted desires.

LP: the Court of Appeal described this as a state of mind so different from that if an ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it as being abnormal

Question 14

Thornton

Answer 14

Mrs T had ben subjected to violence by her husband who was an alcoholic. She came home from a night out and her husband started accusing her of being with another man and hitting her. She went into the kitchen, sharpened a knife and went back and stabbed him

LP: battered women’s syndrome is a recognised medical condition

Question 15

Ahluwalia

Answer 15

Mrs A had been abused by her husband for years, one night he threatened her with violence of she didn’t pay her next bill. So when he fell asleep, some time passed, she then poured petrol on him and set him on fire

LP: battered women’s syndrome is a recognised medical condition

Question 16

Martin

Answer 16

Two burglars entered the D’s house, he had been burgled many times before, Martin armed himself with a shot gun and killed one burglar and injured the other.

LP: the D’s conviction was reduced to VM on the grounds of DM due to stress and depression

Question 17

Vickers

Answer 17

V broke into a sweet shop and hid in the cellar. He knew that the owner of the shop was deaf old lady. When she came down the cellar she saw vickers, where he hit her several times with his fist and kicked he in the head, she dies as a result to her injuries.

LP: if the defendant intends to inflict grievous bodily harm and the victim dies as a result, it has always been sufficient enough in english law to imply malice aforethought.

Question 18

Cunningham

Answer 18

The defendant hit the victim over the head with a bar stool and the victim dies from the head injuries. D held that he didn’t intend any life threatening injuries

LP: that intending to cause serious harm was sufficient for the mens rea of murder

Question 19

Di duca

Answer 19

D had been drinking heavily. He entered the house of an elderly man for the purpose of stealing money, he was surprised by the victim, there was a struggle, the D pushed V onto the bed where he hit him over the head with a wash basen. The V died. D argued that the immediate affects of alcohol caused DM. The courts said it did not.

Question 20

Dowds

Answer 20

The D killed his partner in a frenzy knife attack whilst he was heavily intoxicated, the D and the V were heavily binge drinkers, and often had violent exchanges, mostly started by her and when drunk. The defendant reported the death two days later and could not remember what had happened

LP: voluntary and temporary acute intoxication is not capable of founding DM

Question 21

Dietschman

Answer 21

LP: for the jury to consider:

1. Is D is suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognised medical condition
2. Did the abnormality substantially impair his ability to understand the nature of his conduct
3. Was it a significant factor of the death?

Question 22

Stewart

Answer 22

D was a chronic alcoholic sleeping rough, he killed a man in a course of a fight, he claimed he was suffering from ADS but intoxicated beyond this.

LP: in order for juries to determine whether ADS is relevant to the case, they have to consider the three part test:

1. Was D suffering from abnormality of mental functioning?
2. was the abnormality of mental functioning caused by the ADS?
3. if so, did the ADS impair D’s mental responsibly?

Question 23

Lamb

Answer 23

The D and his friend was playing with a loaded revolver, there were two bullets in the chamber, but they didn’t realise that the chamber revolved when the trigger was pulled. Lamb pointed the gun at his friend and shit him. Lamb nor his friend were in fear so there was no offence - it was not assault.

LP: the D was not charged with unlawful act manslaughter because there was no unlawful act.

Question 24

R v Church

Answer 24

The unlawful act must be such as all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise must subject the other person to, at least, the risk of some harm resulting there from, albeit not serious harm. It does not have to be the D who foresaw the harm by any sobre, reasonable persosn and the risk may be some harm, nit necessarily serious harm.

Question 25

Mitchell

Answer 25

The D punched someone in a queue causing them to fall back and knock over an old lady. She was injured and subsequently died from her injuries. The initial act was criminal and the MR for that particular crime was present

Question 26

R v Dawson

Answer 26

There was an attempted robbery of a filling station by 3 masked men with armed pickaxe handles. The petrol station attendant had a heart attack and died. It was decided that the fear that killed the attendant was not enough to warrant a dangerous act.

Question 27

Corion-Auguiste

Answer 27

The D threw an air bomb firework into the air at a bus station. Everyone panicked and an old lady was knocked to the ground, sustained injuries and died. The D was convinced of her unlawful act manslaughter as his act was the direct cause of her death.

Question 28

Kennedy

Answer 28

The D filled the syringe with herion, handed it to the victim to inject themself and the victim died. The conviction was overturned as the HOL held that the act of the victim accepting the herion and making a conscious choice to inject them self has broken the COC

Question 29

Shohid

Answer 29

The D was one of a group of men who attacked the victim in a railway station. The man was prevented from climbing to safety by some members in the group (not the D) because of this he was killed by a train. The court held that a he initial act (that the D took part in) was sufficiently serious cause of death, although obviously not the only act.

Question 30

Carey

Answer 30

A group of girls attacked the victim. She ran away but collapsed aster a short while and died due to a heart condition. It was decided that the victim was not running from a serious threat as she only received one single punch and it was not serious enough to be as the substantial cause of death ad a reasonable person wouldn’t have foreseen serious harm to the victim.

Question 31

DPP v Newbury and Jones

Answer 31

The D’s were two teenage boys. They pushed a paving stone over a bridge as a train was approaching. The stone smashed through a window and killed the guard. The conviction of UAM was upheld as the court said it was not necessary for the boys to foresee the harm their action would cause. The injury must have just been obvious to a reasonable man.

Question 32

Adamako

Answer 32

D was an anaesthetist who during an operation failed to notice that the breathing tube became disconnected until nine minutes later and the V went into cardiac arrest, the patient never regained consciousness and dies 6 months later of hypoxia. The court held that D’s performance was abysmal, and a competent anaesthetist would have noticed the problem within 15 secs.

Question 33

Singh

Answer 33

The D was responsible for a block of flats owned my his father. The father went to India for a short period and left the D in charge. One of the tenants died due to carbon monoxide poisoning due to a faulty gas fire.

LP: the court of appeal held that the duty did extend to the safety of the tenants and the question had been correctly left to the jury to decide

Question 34

Lichfield

Answer 34

L was the master of the Mania Asumpta, a sailing ship which ran a grounds off the north of cornwall coast. This killed 3 of the 14 crew. L was charged with GNM because he had set sail knowing that the engines might fail due to fuel contamination.

LP: the court if appeal held that L owned a duty of care to every member of his crew. They also held that the question of whether it was breached in a grossly negligent way had also correctly been left to the jury

Question 35

Wacker

Answer 35

W was the driver of a lorry who agreed to bring 60 illegal immigrants into Britain. The only ventilation slot was closed to ensure the immigrants were not seen or heard. It was in the middle of a hot june. When the lorry was stopped and searched, 58 of the 60 people had died due to suffocation. W appealed on the grounds that ye was jointly engaged in the illegal act with the 60 immigrants and therefore should not owe them a duty of care.

LP: the court of appeal held that it was irrelevant whether or not the parties were jointly engaged in a criminal act

Question 36

Willoughby

Answer 36

W was the owner of a disused pub. He had tried to sell the pub for development but several planning applications had been denied. He was in considerable financial difficulty. So he hired the victim to help him burn the pub down to get the insurance. One evening W and the V spread patrol around the pub and started a fire. There was an explosion where part of the building collapsed and fell on the victim which killed him. W was convicted of GNM

Legal point: it was held that W owed V a duty of care because he was the owner of the premises and had specifically enlisted the V to help him perform the act. The fact that the act was criminal did not matter.

Question 37

Evans

Answer 37

D lived with mother and 16 year old half sister, V, who was a herion addict. D bought some herion and gave it to the V who self injected. Later it became obvious that V had overdosed. Neither D not the mother tried to get medical help, instead they put V to bed in hope that she would recover. V died. Both mother and D were convicted of GNM

Legal point: Court of appeal upheld the conviction on the basis that D had created a state of affairs which she/he knew or ought reasonably to have known was life threatening to the V.

Question 38

Batemen

Answer 38

Negligence is so gross when it goes ‘beyond a matter of mere compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving of punishment’

Question 39

Finlay

Answer 39

F was a scout leader in charge of s party of scouts. He chose a very difficult path up to the summit of Snowden, but all the party managed it successfully. The descent down a different route was less successful. A 10 year old boy slipped and fell to his death on the rocks. Evidence given at trial to say several of the proper procedures had not been carried out. Despite this the jury acquitted F.

Legal point: the jury dud not feel that F’s conduct did not show disregard for the life and safety as to amount to GNM

Question 40

Edwards

Answer 40

A and G Edwards had taken their kids and their friends out for a picnic. The edwards children were 7, 9 and 4 months, amd the friends were 11 and 8. The 7 and 8 year olds were best friends (sophie and kirsty). There was lots of conflicting evidence, but the kids were allowed to play on the railway bridge and track, next to where the family were picnicking. Sophie and Kirsty were laying on the tracks when a train came and killed them. The girls’ brothers managed to jump clear of the line just in time.

Legal point: A and G were convicted as they ignored an obvious and serious danger or had to decide to take the risk.

Question 41

Clarke

Answer 41

Absent mindedness could not amount to defect of reason

Question 42

Sullivan

Answer 42

Epilepsy, even though it was temporary didn’t make the defence fail. The epilepsy was an internal factor.

Question 43

Hennessy

Answer 43

H was a diabetic and forgotten to take his insulin which caused an hyperglycaemic fit.
COA held that the hyperglycaemia was an interesting factor due his diabetes causing it.

Question 44

Quick

Answer 44

Q was a diabetic who had an hypoglycaemic fit due to him injecting his insulin but neglecting his eating.
Q attacked a patient
Q had to rely on the defence of automatism due to the hypoglycaemia being brought on by an external cause

Question 45

Windle

Answer 45

W killed his wife by overdosing her on aspirin, he turned himself in and said “I suppose i shall hang for this”. Because he said this meant that he knew the nature of his conduct, meaning he could not rely on this defence

Question 46

Johnson

Answer 46

D went into a neighbours flat and stabbed him.
D was suffering from schizophrenia, but despite this it was found that he knew that what he was doing was wrong. His defence of insanity failed.
Johnson confirmed Windle

Question 47

AG’s ref (no 2 of 1992)

Answer 47

Partial or reduced control of ones actions will not suffice for the defence.

Question 48

Bailey

Answer 48

D failed to eat enough after he took his insulin. If D is charged with a specific intent offence, he can rely on the defence of automatism.

Question 49

Hardie

Answer 49

D took valium to calm him down after his girlfriend told him to move out. He set fore to the wardrobe. Because the D had took the tablets with the sole purpose to calm himself down, he was not reckless.

Question 50

Sheehan & Moore

Answer 50

S & M were very drunk and threw petrol over a tramp and set him on fire. Due to their intoxicated state they did not ave the required MR for murder, but they were convicted of the basic intent offence of manslaughter.

Question 51

AG for Northern Ireland v Gallagher

Answer 51

D decided to kill his wife, so he bought a bottle of whiskey, drunk it, and then stabbed his wife

Dutch courage will not suffice to the defence. D had the required MR prior to his intoxication.