Chapter 3 Flashcards
Factual causation/causation in fact
concerned with inquiry about how the victim died with contribution of the accused
Legal causation/causation in law
concerned with whether the accused should be responsible for the death that occurred
Foreseeability
If the consequences of the accused person’s actions are foreseeable, there is a causal link between the consequences and the person’s actions
Palliative care
Drug or medical treatment that relieves pain without curing the condition
Active euthanasia
Intentional use of a painless method of death to end a person’s pain and suffering
Passive euthanasia
Withdrawing medical treatment to accelerate one’s death from a pre-existing medical condition
Medically assistance in dying (MAID)
Physicians and nurses are able to engage in active euthanasia or medically assisted suicide if the person’s natural death is inevitabel
Assisted Suicide
When an individual assists another person to commit suicide
Physician-assisted suicide
When a physician assists a person to commit suicide
First degree murder
Deliberate and planned homicide
Substantial and integral cause
Test of causation strictly applied to first degree murder
What are the general rules of causation?
- Actus reus includes a consequence
- Crown must show that the accused caused the consequences
- Mens rea is foreseeability
Intervening act
An intervening act can disrupt the chain of causation between the defendant’s wounding and the victim’s death
Improper medical treatment
Improper medical treatment not performed in good faith can disrupt the chain of causation between the defendant’s wounding and the victim’s death
When is a person considered legally dead?
When an irreversible cessation of the person’s brain functions have occurred
Smither’s test
Test to inquire if the accused’s conduct constituted a “contributing cause outside the de minimis range”
Nette Test
Test to inquire if the accused’s conduct constituted a “significant contributing cause”
What are the 3 types of foreseeability?
Intention, recklessness, negligence
Intention (foreseeability)
Accused foresaw the consequences
Recklessness (foreseeability)
Accused foresaw that their was a risk that consequences may occur
Negligence (foreseeability)
Accused did not foresee the consequences or risks, but a reasonable person in the same situation would have
Contributing cause outside of de minimis range
Shown to have had more than a minimal impact on the events leading up to the victim’s death
What must be established to prove factual causation
“but for” the accused’s conduct, the consequences would have never occurred
Harbottle Test
Test to determine whether the accused’s conduct was a substantial and integral cause for death
When is the Harbottle Test used?
After factual causation is established and only applies to first degree murder
