Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law First Year > Criminal Law Second Term > Flashcards

Criminal Law Second Term Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

DPP for NI v Lynch on MR

A

No intent needed, just knowldge

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

R v Hasan

A

Prostitute’s boyfriend

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

For s.6, does R v Wood have the necessary MR?

A

He thought it abandoned so no

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

R v Mitchell

A

Post office; transferred malice of dangerous act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

R v Kingston

A

Intoxicated paedo

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What case shows that it is irrelevant if V was happy for duty to be neglected?

A

R v Wacker

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Why was a defence necessary in Re A?

A

Because of indirect intention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

In which soft law instrument does it state that there needs to be a statistical link between the risks created by drinking and those created by D’s acts?

A

Modal Penal Code

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

R v Powell and English on fundamental difference

A

HoL found tenable argument that should have gone to the jury if wood is fundamentally different to a knife

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What did Matthews and Alleyne highlight about indirect intention?

A

Jury must be told about discretion under Woollin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the two partial defences to murder?

A

Diminished responsibility and loss of control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

R v Vinall

A

Bicycles at bus stop

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What does the case of Diestchemann tell us about the causation of an abnormality?

A

Need not be the only reason, just substantial

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

When does Majewski not apply to basic intent (Brady)?

A

When D would have done the same sober

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the basic definition of theft?

A

Dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

R v Velumyl

A

Company director

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Why do Horder and McGowan prefer GNMS to UAMS?

A

Not limited specific non-fatal offence against V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Who argues that there should be a margin of sympathy for doctors under indirect intent?

A

Ashworth, “Criminal Liability in a Medical Context”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What section of Theft Act provides a get out, usually when it’s a gift?

A

S.3(2)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the only difference between s.18 and murder?

A

Chance outcome of death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

R v Mitchell on s.6?

A

Court distinguished between hiding and leaving the object in an obvious place

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

R v Sutcliffe

A

Experts concluded together but still convicted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Who argued for an exclusionary effect of the insanity defence?

A

Child and Sullivan, “When does the Insanity Defence Apply?”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What case outlines the definition of a ‘human being’?

A

Attorney-General’s Reference (No.3 of 1994)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Why was R v Lloyd not a permanent deprivation?

A

Object still had virtue

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Ratio in Watson?

A

Entire act need not be dangerous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case showed that the question of whether condition was ‘significant’ for DR is left to the jury?

A

R v Khan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

R v Clarkson

A

Barracks rape and friends

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Lawrence v MPC on s.3

A

P deliberately omitted ‘without the consent of the owner’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What section is diminished responsibility under in CJA?

A

S.52

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What judge in particular considered private defence?

A

Ward LJ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What did Hale suggest in Hasan to look after battered women?

A

Limit to forcing others to do criminal acts, suggesting Law Com’s suggestion of associating ‘without reasonable excuse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What are the three main elements of insanity?

A

1) defect of reason, (2) from disease of the mind (3) so as (a) not to know nature/quality of act OR (b) know it was wrong

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Ratio in Dawson?

A

Not with hindsight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What case shows that diminished responsibility is not the same as insanity due to needing MR?

A

R v Byrne

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What does the case of DPP for NI v Maxwell say?

A

Can infer from the fact you know P to be terrorists that weapons will be involved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

R v Mitchell

A

Stolen car

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

R v Bailey

A

Pipe to batter wife’s lover

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

DPP for NI v Lynch

A

IRA hijacked

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What does Hasan say primarily in duress by threats?

A

You cannot voluntarily associate with someone you know or ought to know uses threats to force others to do things

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What does Keown believe was confused in Bland?

A

Sanctity of life and vitalism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What does Beckford v R show?

A

Most responses are reasonable if you believe your life to be in danger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What did Steyn reject in Hinks?

A

Appropriates is preceded by ‘unlawfully’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Carter v Richardson

A

Driving instructor and other drunk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

who suggested the number of NGRI verdicts is levelling out?

A

Mackay “Ten More Years of the Insanity Defence”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Why was automatism refused as a defence in Coley?

A

Enough control to find the key

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

R v Pittwood

A

Train crossing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Tuck v Robson

A

After hours in pub (aid and abet)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What case shows that an omission cannot form a UA for UAMS?

A

Lowe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

R v Burgess

A

Sleepwalking without external event so insanity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What Act covers theft and in what sections?

A

The Theft Act 1968, s.1-6

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What are the elements of unlawful act manslaughter?

A

D committed an unlawful act, it was ‘dangerous’ and it ‘caused’ the death of V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What does R v Turner show about s.5?

A

You can steal your own property

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Beckford v R

A

Policeman and brother gun

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

R v Safi

A

Hijack plane

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Who gave the test for dishonesty in Ghosh?

A

Lord Lane CJ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

R v Gnango on victim rule

A

Victims are capable of assisting offences against them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

What case shows duress by threats is never a defence to murder?

A

R v Howe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

R v Marshall

A

Ticket tout; travelcards belonged to LU

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What case enforces the fact that the threat for duress needs to be of death/serious harm (e.g. Moriarty v Brookes –> Piercing skin)?

A

R v Dao

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

National Coal Board v Gamble on MR

A

Overweight lorry; knowledge, not intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

What is the MR for murder?

A

D needs to have intended death or GBH (R v Cunningham)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

What did Mustill say to show his concern with adjudicating Bland?

A

‘proper subject for legal adjudication’?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

R v Navabi

A

insufficient funds not theft because purely contractual right for bank to pay

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Carter v Richardson on MR

A

A must realise D will commit with necessary MR

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

What did Ashworth suggest about 2nd degree murder under Law Com proposals?

A

May need a new label or juries may be way to convict under it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

R v Asmelash

A

‘General’ in s.54(3) only applies to permanent disorder; can’t consider voluntary intoxication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Who in Hasan was concerned about battered women under duress by threats?

A

Hale

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

R v Hall

A

Travel agent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

R v Yemoh

A

Manslaughter instead of murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

R v Pommell

A

Firearm friend suicide

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

What case shows Brennan not being followed in DR?

A

R v Sutcliffe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

Which case, according to Rogers, conflicts fundamentally with Kennedy?

A

Evans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

R v Hinks on s.2 dishonesty

A

Dolphin may still have consented to Hinks taking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Why was there no duty to continue treatment in Re B?

A

He rejected it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

What was direction on intent at time of abandonment only sufficient for in R v Vinall?

A

Theft, not robbery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

R v T

A

Rape and robbery; PTSD

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

R v Kohn

A

Steal whilst not in overdraft, but not when in it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

Which case showed the courts rejecting voluntary intoxication and then deciding on a clan acquittal, despite liability for insanity?

A

R v Harris

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

R v Calhaem

A

C hired hitman, hammer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

R v Dix

A

Reputable medical evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

R v Dietschemann

A

Drunk, elderly aunt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

What did the court reject in Bland as a possible route?

A

Expanding Re F

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

Why did the court reject expanding Re F in Bland?

A

He had no best interests of any kind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

What section of what statute governs for self defence?

A

S.73 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

R v Bainbridge on MR

A

Can be liable if oxygen equipment used to steal but unlikely for assault as not in contemplation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

A-G of Jersey v Holley

A

Depression; provocation. No mental disorder should be considered.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

In what act can the two partial defences to murder be found?

A

Coroners and Justice Act 2003

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

R v Briggs

A

Elderly relatives moving close

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

What case shows that if you create a dangerous situation you may have a duty to V?

A

R v Evans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

R v Bailey

A

Nickel loan; looked at Ghosh too soon when agreement in law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

R v Hinks

A

Short sliver of time to give contemporaneity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

R v Bainbridge

A

Oxygen equipment for safes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

R v Bryce

A

Caravan; aiding by bringing him into company

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

Why was it decided that they could turn off the machine in Bland?

A

No hope, best interests have gone so no duty to keep him alive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

Why was Hardie not a case of intoxication?

A

Didn’t realise he would become intoxicated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

R v Clarkson on MR for accessories

A

Requires intent that presence assists

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

A-G Ref (No.3 of 2004)

A

Mobster, shot in air, fundamentally different

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

What should the trial judge not have said in Woollin?

A

‘substantial risk’ because blurs line between MS and murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

R v Adomako

A

Eye anaesthetist; oxygen

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

What was the UA in Meeking?

A

Road Traffic Act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

R v Shayler

A

MI5 plots

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

What do the cases of Tuck v Robson and R v Webster show D has a duty to do in order to avoid aiding and abetting?

A

Stop a crime if they have the power

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

What is the moral equivalent thesis of 1st degree murder under Law Com proposals?

A

Awareness of significant risk is equal to intending, so both are applicable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

What was decided in R v Velumyl under s.6?

A

Needs to pay back the exact money he took to not be guilty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

What case shows you can rely on intoxication as a way to prove lack of MR?

A

R v Lipman

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

What is the direction in Golds on effect of abnormality?

A

Must be more than ‘trivial or minimal’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

What does Clinton say about infidelity for loss of control?

A

If it was the only cause , no defence , but usually a range

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

R v Hardie

A

Valium, fire

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

What case shows that D needs to directly intend the outcome to have direct intention; i.e. not just appear to be helping?

A

R v Steane

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

What does Rogers say about necessity and P?

A

Necessity challenges the supremacy of P

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

R v Saunders and Archer

A

Poison apple for wife but son

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

What section does R v Gilks fall under?

A

S.5: obtained property by mistake and duty to restore

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

R v Bryce on MR of accessories

A

Didn’t need to know P would go through with it, just a real possibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

R v Hatton

A

Sledgehammer, martial arts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q

Who said the degree of foresight is high enough to be sufficiently close to culpability associated with murder?

A

Rogers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q

R v Cheshire on causing the death?

A

Only need logical link, regardless of intervention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
86
Q

R v Oye

A

Devil constables

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q

In what case were the points in C v DPP so important as to mean no defence of necessity was given?

A

R v Nicklinson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q

Ratio in Calhaem?

A

Not necessary to show counselling was a substantial cause of offence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

What case shows breach must create an obvious risk of death to the reasonable person?

A

R v Misra

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

R v Codere

A

Knew it was unlawful

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

R v Rahman on accessory and acting outside common purpose

A

Rodger considers if P and D want to kill A, but P kills BDEF, D only liable for A

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q

R v Lowe

A

Neglect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q

Why was the case of Quick automatism?

A

Caused not by disease (insanity) but by insulin (automatism)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
91
Q

Re A

A

Surgical separation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q

What is an additional defence under duress by circumstance?

A

S.31 Immigration and Asylum Act 1999

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q

R v Wood

A

Abandoned; honest unreasonable belief owner was gone

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
93
Q

R v Pitham and Mehl

A

Trying to sell furniture; guilty of assumption

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
94
Q

R v Tyrrell

A

Underage sex; can’t convict V because protected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
95
Q

Oxford v Moss

A

Exam paper

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
96
Q

R v Gomez on consent in s.3

A

It is irrelevant for indefeasible or voidable title

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
96
Q

Edwards v Ddin

A

Petrol in car; no MR at time of appropriation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
98
Q

R v Dowds

A

Drunk and wife

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
99
Q

R v Morris

A

Switched labels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
101
Q

Who highlights that 1st degree murder under the Law Commission’s Recommendations for Homicide Law Reform confirms to ‘moral equivalence thesis’?

A

Ashworth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
103
Q

What case shows uncertain scope of GNMS does not violate Art.7 ECHR?

A

Misra

103
Q

What case throws doubt on R v T?

A

Coley

104
Q

What case did allow duress by threats as a defence but would now come under complicity rules?

A

R v Lynch

104
Q

R v Kingston

A

Paedophile drug

105
Q

R v Nedrick

A

Lighted petrol; subjective intention/virtual certainty

105
Q

R v Woollin

A

Throw baby

107
Q

What did they never find in Beckford v R?

A

A gun

109
Q

Who said that Bland leaves the law in a ‘morally and intellectually misshapen’ state?

A

Mustill

109
Q

R v Rahman

A

Three stab wounds; only need to foresee necessary MR, not exact MR

110
Q

R v Gianetto

A

Enough to encourage for aid and abet

112
Q

R v Brown

A

Adjustment disorder

113
Q

What Article is activated by the NGRI verdict?

A

Article 5 ECHR

114
Q

R v Gnango on JE

A

Crown Court was wrong; needs to be a distinct Crime A and Crime B

115
Q

R v Dawson

A

Petrol station

116
Q

R v Thabo Meli

A

Beat up, cliff

117
Q

What did R v Mendez note about the FD rule and guidance?

A

The FD rule is unclear, leading to confusing guidance set out in paragraph 14

118
Q

R v Ghosh

A

Surgeon, consultancy fees

119
Q

R v Hasan on Hudson and Taylor

A

Wrongly decided

120
Q

What was the ratio in Thabo Meli?

A

You can find causation through a sequence of acts; not necessarily all together

122
Q

What two cases show V must be aware if D is to be convicted of GNMS for undertaking responsibility?

A

R v Evans; R v Sinclair, Johnson and Smith

123
Q

R v Brennan

A

All experts agreed

125
Q

Why does Majewski not apply to murder?

A

Majewski is only for basic intent offences

125
Q

What is Calhaem an example of ?

A

Counselling

126
Q

R v JM and SM

A

Bouncers; case left to jury

127
Q

R v Turner (No.2)

A

Service station

128
Q

R v Meeking

A

Motorway handbrake

129
Q

Corcoran v Whent

A

Ate food then planned to run off - already appropriated

130
Q

Re B

A

Paralysed

131
Q

R v Bronson

A

Police hostage

133
Q

What does s.8 CJA say about direct intention for murder?

A

You cannot infer it from natural/foreseeable consequences

134
Q

What case conflicts with A-G Ref (No.1 of 1983) on s.3?

A

R v Gresham

135
Q

What type of defence is necessity?

A

Utilitarian

137
Q

Sharman v HM Coroner for Inner North London & Another

A

Coffee table leg

138
Q

What is the one requirement of the defendant in duress by circumstance in terms of a positive duty?

A

Seek police protection if possible

139
Q

What are the two key phrases Coke gave for his definition of murder?

A

‘Malice aforethought’ and ‘man of sound memory’

140
Q

R v Webster on AR

A

Drink driving friend accomplice by not stopping him

142
Q

What section of CJIA does Hatton fall under?

A

S.76(5)

143
Q

R v Gamble

A

Kneecapping; knife to slit

145
Q

R v Church

A

Mock sexually

146
Q

R v Wacker

A

Illegal immigrant

147
Q

What was Edmund Davies LJ’s direction for ‘dangerous’ in UAMS?

A

‘such as all sober and reasonable people would’ perceive the risk of at least ‘some harm’

148
Q

A-G Ref (No.1 of 1975)

A

Laced friend’s drink; driver

150
Q

What two cases show intoxication cannot lead to a partial defence for murder (without a recognised mental condition for DR, e.g. Dietschemann)?

A

R v Asmelash (loss of control) and R v Dowds

151
Q

What three cases show murder throw omission?

A

R v Matthews and Alleyne; Re B; Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

152
Q

R v Khan

A

If condition was ‘significant’ is left to the jury

154
Q

R v Bowen

A

Cannot consider anything for duress by threats that makes D more vulnerable outside of age/gender

155
Q

R v Clarke

A

Shoplifting

155
Q

R v Feely

A

Manager in betting shop; intention to repay irrelevant

157
Q

R v Scarlett

A

Drunken customer

158
Q

What two cases show that D’s actions must be seen to reasonably relate to their objective in duress by circumstance?

A

Shayler and Bronson

160
Q

R v Golds

A

Sever psychosis

161
Q

R v Bryce on MR

A

Final word: knowledge is enough for assisting/encouraging

162
Q

A-G Ref (No.1 of 1983)

A

Policewoman overpaid

163
Q

What are Kington and A-G Ref (No. 1 of 1975) examples of?

A

Procuring

164
Q

R v Church on causing the death?

A

Need only have the different elements at some point during the event

165
Q

What abnormality was found in Brown to fit under DR?

A

Adjustment disorder

166
Q

Who gave two ways an act can be involuntary; by its nature (flight) and by V’s characteristics (R v Blaue)?

A

T Jones

167
Q

R v Singh

A

Carbon monoxide; manager of flats

168
Q

What was decided in Briggs?

A

Deceptions are not covered in the Theft Act

169
Q

what is the modern definition of murder?

A

An act or omission causing the death of a human under the Queen’s peace, done with an intent to kill or seriously harm any human being

170
Q

Why is it unlikely duress by circumstances will allow defence for murder?

A

Modelled off duress by threats

171
Q

Lawrence v MPC

A

Overcharged student; regardless of consent to appropriation

172
Q

Why was Lipman not automatism?

A

Voluntary intoxication

173
Q

What does s.73 SOA seem to acknowledge?

A

Doctors would be liable for accessory after Bryce

174
Q

R v Valderrama-Vega

A

‘But for’ cause, so motivated by threat to release homosexual activities and money, but mostly personal violence

176
Q

Attorney-General’s Reference (No.3 of 1994)

A

independent existence from mother needed

178
Q

When is the only time intoxication is a defence?

A

When no MR as a result

180
Q

why was the defence of intoxication not allowed in Kingston?

A

He knew what he was doing was wrong so still had MR

181
Q

Re A

A

Conjoined twins

182
Q

R v Hudson and Taylor

A

Consider D’s position for reasonable reaction

183
Q

What case gives a ‘but for’ cause for duress by threats?

A

R v Valderrama-Vega

183
Q

R v Quayle and others

A

Cannabis pain

185
Q

What three types of duty of care are there under GNMS?

A

Special relationship/created dangerous situation/undertook responsibility

186
Q

What case shows reputable medical evidence is needed for DR?

A

Dix

187
Q

Why was R v Hall not guilty under s.5?

A

Breached contract but no obligation to deal with specific money in a certain way

188
Q

R v Bristow

A

JE; deserted farm

189
Q

Name at least two cases which have found a disease of the mind to comply with insanity against modern perception?

A

R v Kemp (restricted), Sullivan (epilepsy), Hennessy (hyperglycaemia) or Burgess (sleepwalking)

190
Q

What does the case of Safi show about duress by circumstance?

A

D needs to reasonably believe he had to do what he did to escape

191
Q

What kind of intent was found in Re A, requiring a defence?

A

Oblique/indirect

192
Q

What should the court have said in Oye?

A

Insane delusions are not mistaken beliefs

194
Q

What does the case of Dowds say about DR?

A

If you’re drunk, no DR defence

196
Q

What happened in R v Dawes in regard to the judgment?

A

Decided that he didn’t attack with intention of providing defence, but couldn’t prove loss of control anyway

197
Q

What Act gives the minimum periods for murder?

A

Criminal Justice Act 2003

197
Q

who believes that it is wrong to damn intoxication as a wrong in itself purely due to its risky nature?

A

Simester, Intoxication is never a defence.

199
Q

DPP v Camplin

A

Chapatti

200
Q

How does Rogers suggest any breach of Art.7 could be avoided under liability for death arising from drug misuse?

A

List of examples of relationships leading to duty of care

200
Q

What does Camplin say about s.54(3) of CJA for loss of control?

A

Reasonable person must be of same age and gender

201
Q

Name at least three cases on the fundamental difference rule

A

R v Powell and English; A-G Ref (No.3 of 2004); R v Gamble; R v Rehman

202
Q

Why could R v Coley not rely on automatism?

A

Voluntary intoxication through cannabis (external factor)

203
Q

What is the test for dishonesty in Ghosh?

A

‘according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest’ and D realised it was dishonest

204
Q

What does Lawrence v MPC show about s.3?

A

Regardless of consent to appropriation

206
Q

Why did Kay v Butterworth not fall under automatism?

A

Realised she was drowsy

207
Q

R v Matthews and Alleyne

A

River

208
Q

What does Gillick clash with on MR for accessories?

A

DPP for NI v Lynch; National Coal Board v Gamble

210
Q

Which case created defence of duress by circumstance?

A

R v Conway

210
Q

R v Windle

A

Only means legally wrong, not morally; spoke about hanging for giving suicidal wife an overdose.

211
Q

What does Rogers advocate for private defence?

A

For it to be extended

213
Q

R v Sullivan

A

Epilepsy

214
Q

R v Watson

A

Burglary

215
Q

What case shows duress by threats is never a defence to attempted murder?

A

R v Gotts

216
Q

DPP v Newbury

A

Paving slab

217
Q

Who argues for a ‘quasi-causal relation… of controlling influence’ when D causes V’s suicide through abuse?

A

Horder and McGowan

219
Q

Why should the trial judge not have referred to ‘substantial risk’ in Woollin?

A

blurs line between murder and MS

220
Q

What are two partial defences to murder?

A

Loss of control and diminished responsibility

221
Q

What is R v Yemoh authority for?

A

D is liable for the lesser offence he did anticipate

222
Q

R v Gresham

A

Partner died but repayments; need to actually touch money

224
Q

R v Lipman

A

LSD; Snake

225
Q

Why could Bailey not rely on automatism?

A

He allowed himself to get into the state he did.

225
Q

R v Powell and English

A

Drug trade (P knew knife) and policeman (E didn’t know knife)

226
Q

R v Gomez

A

Defunct cheque; voidable title but still theft

227
Q

What two cases show D undertaking a responsibility through their job for GNMS?

A

R v Singh; R v Pittwood

228
Q

R v Quick

A

Hypoglycaemia; patient assaulted.

229
Q

What are the two main cases on indirect intention?

A

R v Nedrick; R v Woollin

231
Q

What are the requirements for automatism?

A

Complete loss of control without D’s knowledge

232
Q

R v Mendez

A

House party; knife unknown but knew wood

234
Q

A-G Ref (No 1 of 1983)

A

Policewoman overpaid; sufficient to keep in bank

236
Q

Who said that Nedrick;Woollin may have widened intention too much, forcing Re A to find a defence?

A

Rogers

237
Q

R v Beccera

A

Left through window; need more overt at scene of crime?

239
Q

Why was Clarke not considered a case of insanity?

A

absentmindedness is not insanity.

241
Q

R v Dudley and Stephens

A

Sailors; hierarchical

241
Q

R v Kemp

A

Restricted blood; beat son

242
Q

DPP for NI v Maxwell

A

IRA terrorists

243
Q

R v Gnango

A

Bandana man

244
Q

R v Smith & Others

A

Robbery of heroin dealer

246
Q

‘Like a brother’ in GNMS?

A

R v Johnson, Sinclair and Smith

248
Q

What academic argues for two possible reforms to involuntary manslaughter; ‘Good Samaritan’ or liability for death arising from drug misuse?

A

J Rogers

250
Q

What two cases outline a test for dishonesty when not covered in s.2?

A

Feely and Ghosh

251
Q

R v Graham

A

Reasonable person for duress by threats

252
Q

What was the ration in Bristow?

A

For JE dangerousness is considered at the outset

254
Q

What did the case of Pommell show about duress by circumstance?

A

Not limited to driving offences

255
Q

What two cases regretted the decision in R v Cunningham?

A

R v Rahman and A-G Reference (No.3 of 1994)

256
Q

Why is it debatable if omission in Dobinson amounted to causing death?

A

V may not have ben sectioned anyway

258
Q

Why does Keown argue Bland has confused the law?

A

Prohibits active but allows passive killing.

259
Q

R v Harris

A

Reckless arson

260
Q

What are the three mental condition defences?

A

Intoxication, insanity and automatism

261
Q

R v Bourne

A

Wife and dog

262
Q

What are the two types of involuntary manslaughter?

A

Gross negligence and unlawful act

264
Q

R v Lipman

A

LSD

265
Q

What two cases show UAMS ‘dangerous’ test is objective?

A

DPP v Newbury; Church

266
Q

What two cases show it is not a duress by circumstance unless the threat is only a one-off?

A

R v Quayle and London Borough of Southwark v Williams

267
Q

What five points were not discussed in Re A but should have been?

A

Lord Lowry’s five points from C v DPP (special defence for 10 - 14?)

268
Q

R v Marshall on s.6?

A

Exposed LU to risk of permanently losing tickets

270
Q

London Borough of Southwark v Williams

A

Homeless trespass

271
Q

What are the three defences to being an accessory?

A

P acts outside common purpose, A withdraws effectively and A is a protected victim

272
Q

Which case shows that when all experts agree on significant cause, the case should not go to trial?

A

R v Brennan

274
Q

R v Hennessy

A

Hyperglycaemia without intoxication (hasn’t taken anything) not automatism.

275
Q

R v Grundy

A

Information to burglar 2 weeks before

277
Q

R v Carey et al

A

Punch/chase

278
Q

R v Steane

A

German broadcast

279
Q

R v Lloyd

A

Cinema projections

280
Q

R v Hinks on s.3

A

Small sliver of time to appropriate

281
Q

R v Majewski

A

Intoxication not to deny MR for basic intent

282
Q

How was Re A distinguished from Dudley?

A

Not playing God, marked for death, not clearly against morality, indirect as opposed to direct intent

284
Q

To what Article does Rogers refer to show lethal force is permitted to defend from unlawful violence?

A

Article 2(2)(a) ECHR

285
Q

In what case did D plead guilty to avoid the insanity defence?

A

R v Sullivan (epilepsy)

286
Q

What case shows the need for evidence of a close relationship under GNMS?

A

R v Evans

287
Q

R v Dao

A

Cultivating cannabis

288
Q

What was the UA in Scarlett?

A

Battery

289
Q

Anorexia in GNMS?

A

R v Dobinson

291
Q

R v Dadson

A

Felon

292
Q

What does Oxford v Moss show about s.4?

A

Property does not include trade secrets/confidential info

293
Q

DPP v K and B

A

Girl, bullies, boy

294
Q

Gillick on MR for accessories

A

Intent not to encourage so no MR

295
Q

R v Le Bron

A

Dragging

296
Q

What case is the most important for proving causation under murder?

A

R v Thabo Meli

297
Q

R (Ricketts) v Basildon Magistrates’ Court

A

Charity shop - Oxfam and BHF

299
Q

What right was appropriated in Morris?

A

Right to decide price

300
Q

Kay v Butterworth

A

Sleeping soldiers

301
Q

What does Mendez suggest about the fundamental difference rule?

A

It might be about whether the object is fundamentally more likely to kill

303
Q

R v Dawes

A

Man with wife

305
Q

R v Byrne

A

DR not same as insanity

306
Q

What elements are needed for GNMS?

A

D owed a duty of care not to harm/to assist V, D did or failed to do something in breach, breach created obvious risk of death, breach caused V’s death and D’s negligence was so gross as to merit criminal culpability

307
Q

R v Gilks

A

Horse bet, lost but won

308
Q

R v Marshall

A

Ticket tout

309
Q

R v Conway

A

Created defence of duress by circumstances; dangerous driving getaway

310
Q

What was said about the precise level of certainty in Nedrick?

A

‘little short of overwhelming’

311
Q

What section is loss of control under in CJA?

A

S.54/55

312
Q

Who suggests we should do away with indirect intention for murder?

A

Rogers

313
Q

Who said it is criminal homicide to create a situation so cruel that death is preferable?

A

Jerome Hall

314
Q

Who argues that necessity should never be used unless there is no other defence?

A

Rogers, “Necessity, Private Defence and the Killing of Mary”

315
Q

R v Cogan and Leak

A

Roleplay

316
Q

What was the defence found in Re A?

A

Defence of necessity

317
Q

Mitchell v King

A

Must be an overt withdrawal from participation

319
Q

R v Maloney

A

Son father, drunk.

320
Q

R v Millward

A

Defective tractor and public highway

321
Q

R v Brady

A

Pub fall

322
Q

Gillick v West Norfolk Health Authority on aiding and abetting

A

would aid boyfriend so AR present

323
Q

What case shows simple negligence is not sufficient for criminal law?

A

R v Adomako

325
Q

Ratio in Le Bron?

A

Likely that intention for UA needs to be linked to cause; if intention in taking her into the house was to say sorry, not liable, but if to get her off the street then yes

326
Q

What was the guidance given in R v Woollin?

A

‘Virtually certain and not entitled to infer intention’

327
Q

What does R v Smith & Others show about s.4?

A

Property includes unlawful possession

328
Q

What case shows there is no light assumption of abandonment?

A

R (Ricketts) v Basildon Magistrates’ Court

329
Q

What is the AR for murder?

A

Anything CAUSING death

330
Q

R v Clinton

A

Infidelity

331
Q

R v Coley

A

Video games

332
Q

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

A

Hillsborough PVS

333
Q

What two cases suggest reckless manslaughter no longer exists?

A

R v Adomako; R v Lidar

334
Q

What is the principal case for insanity in giving a definition?

A

M’Naghten’s Case from 1843

335
Q

How does Jones’ conclusion and Rogers’ conclusion differ on involuntary manslaughter?

A

Rogers thinks only when supply is for gain; Jone doesn’t mention

336
Q

what are the requirements of Article 5?

A

Right to liberty and security from arbitrary detainment.

337
Q

What case shows you can only give reasonable person in duress by threats same age and gender as D?

A

R v Bowen

338
Q

What is the ratio in R v Dadson?

A

Cannot rely on self-defence if you didn’t not know you could have acted in self-defence prior to acting

339
Q

Who agrees with Rogers that there should be offence for causing death by supply?

A

T Jones

340
Q

What were the three routes the court considered in Re A?

A

Family law, criminal law and private defence

341
Q

What did the appellant in Beckford allege?

A

That he had been shot at, so he fired back

342
Q

R v Webster on MR of accessories

A

Needs to think it likely, then omission once he realises his friend is drunk

Law First Year (24 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions