Chapter 4 Flashcards
What is Causation?
- Meaning to establish a link between the conduct and the consequences
- The crown must prove both legal and factual causation
In order to establish causation..
the crown must answer the “but for” question.
- That “but for” the accused’s conduct, the prohibited consequences would never have occurred
What is Factual Causation?
- Refers to fact of how the victim came to his/her death
What is Legal Causation?
Refers to whether the accused should be held criminally responsible in law for the death that occured.
- There is an element of forseeability, meaning the conduct should be considered blameworthy to warrant criminal punishment
What is Forseeability?
The consequences of one’s action is foreseeable , hence there is a causal link between the action and its consequences
Foreseeability of harm or consequence of the death
Case of Smithers
- Charged with Manslaughter
- Smithers got into a fight with Coby, threw two punches to the head and a kick in the victim’s stomach, he died in the hospital to “aspiration of vomit”
- Trial judge determined the act was “outside the deminisus range”
- Meaning = the kick was significant enough factor in causing death
- Smither’s counsel appealed on the basis of insufficient evidence that Smithers kick caused vomiting which is causation
Supreme Court decision: Reworded the initial causation
What is Smithers a test of?
Factual Causation
What tests establish factual causation?
Smithers and Nette Test
Case of Harbottle (1993)
The accused and another man sexually assaulted a 17 year- old
The old man strangled her and Harbottle held her legs from resisting
Is Smither’s test adequate in the context of 1st degree murder? Yes!
The SCC; test is not strict enough for charge of 1st degree
The SCC decision: “the crown must establish that the accused has committed an act or series of acts which are of such nature that they must be regarded as a substantial and integral cause of death.”
The test requires to prove that the accused play a very active role (a physical one) in the killing
What 2 elements must intervening acts prove;
- Factual causation (foreseeable)
- Not an independent act
When an intervening act or event occurs;
When an intervening act or event occurs between the accused persons initial wounding of the victim and the victim’s subsequent death- severs (break off) the chain of causation
R.v.Kitching, Adams (1976)
Charged with manslaughter by committing an unlawful act
He was thrown on the concrete pavement by two bouncers.. two fracture at the base of the skull
The Crown must prove;
Nette test applicable in such cases:
Initial wounding was “significant contributing cause” or
The intervening act was reasonably foreseeable consequence of the accused persons conduct
Maybin
Charged with manslaughter
Intervening factor: the conduct of the bouncer
No conclusive cause of death
The chain of causation was severed from the punch from the bouncer. The outside intervening factor severed the chain of causation
Intervening factor: the conduct of the bouncer
Trial judge decision: acquitted, factual causation was proved “but for” however the court judge couldn’t decide on the legal causation (the chain of causation was severed by the intervention of the bouncer)- three causes of death
Trial judge decision: acquitted, factual causation was proved “but for” however the court judge couldn’t decide on the legal causation (the chain of causation was severed by the intervention of the bouncer)-
Three causes of death
Court of Appeal: overthrow the acquittal and ordered a new trial
The appellants assaults remained a significant contributing cause of death despite the intervening act of the bouncers because(a) the intervening act was reasonably foreseeable; or (b) the intervening act was not an intentional, intentional, independent act.
SCC decision: “the dangerous and unlawful act of the accused of the accused must be a significant contributing cause of victim’s death.”
The case of Sarazin (2011)
Sarrazin (2011)
Charged with 2nd degree murder
Noel brought a gun and start having intense argument. Sarzin shots a man in the adamin. Noel (the victim). Doctor determines the wound is severe in adamin, doctors performs surgery on a liver. Noel is released from the hospital and uses cocaine and dies.
Intervening factors include the operation …and
Appeal due to crown not able to prove factual causation
Sarrazin is convicted of attempted murder
What is a voluntary act?
An act that is one that is a product of the accused free will
