Culpable Homicide Flashcards
Define Homicide, Section 158 of the Crimes Act 1961
Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever.
Can an organisation be charged with murder or manslaughter? Explain your answer and refer to the relevant case law:
Manslaughter: an organisation can be convicted as a party to the offence (s66(1) CA61).
Murder: an organisation cannot be convicted as either a principal offender or a party to the offence. This is because the offence carries a mandatory life sentence.
Murray Wright Ltd - Because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation (such as a hospital or food company) cannot be convicted as a principal offender.
Section 159(1) and 159(2) of the Crimes Act 1961 define when a child becomes a human being and is therefore able to be murdered under Section 158. Detail the provisions of Section 159(1) and 159(2):
159(1) - A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this act when it has completely proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother, whether it has breathed or not, whether it has an independent circulation or not, and whether the navel string is severed or not.
159(2) - The killing of such child is homicide if it dies in consequence of injuries received before, during, or after birth.
Outline culpable homicide - Section 160(1) and (2) of the Crimes Act 1961 (UOBFF)
(1) Homicide may be either culpable or not culpable.
(2) Homicide is culpable when it consists in the killing of any person -
(A) By an unlawful act; or
(B) By an omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty; or
(C) By both combined; or
(D) By causing that person by threats or fear of violence, or by deception, to do an act which causes his death; or
(E) By wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person.
What are the three specific causations of homicide in Section 160(2)(d)?
Threats of violence, fear of violence, deception.
What does R v Myatt state about an unlawful act in respect of Section 160(2)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961?
[Before a breach of any Act, regulation or bylaw would be an unlawful act under s160 for the purposes of culpable homicide] It must be an act likely to do harm to the deceased or to some class of persons of whom he was one.
Under Section 160(2)(a), the act must be unlawful. Describe what an unlawful act is in relation to this section and include the relevant case law.
An unlawful act means a breach of any Act, regulation, rule, or bylaw.
CL - R v Myatt
In common law, allegations of culpable homicide have been supported where the offenders have caused death by particular circumstances. Name any four of these circumstances:
- Committing arson
- Giving a child an excessive amount of alcohol to drink
- Placing hot cinders and straw on a drunk person to frighten them
- Supplying heroin to the deceased
- Throwing a large piece of concrete from a motorway over bridge into the path of an approaching car
- Conducting an illegal abortion where the mother dies
Explain what is meant by Section 160(2)(b) - an omission to perform a legal duty:
This covers cases where nothing is done when there is a legal duty to act, and certain cases of positive conduct accompanied by a failure to discharge a legal duty, in particular a duty of care.
Define legal duty:
Refers to those duties imposed by statute or common law including uncodified common law duties.
List four statutory legal duties in respect of the Crimes Act 1961:
Duties imposed by statute are mainly common law duties that have been embodied in statute. The Crimes Act 1961 defines duties to:
- Provide the necessaries and protect from injury (s151)
- Provide necessaries and protect from injury to your charges when you are a parent or guardian (s152)
- Provide necessaries as an employer (s153)
- Use reasonable knowledge and skill when performing acts, such as surgery (s155)
- Take precautions when in charge of dangerous things, such as machinery (s156)
- Avoid omissions that will endanger life (s157)
What was held in R v Tomars with relation to threats, fear of violence and deception?
Formulates the issues in the following way:
- Was the deceased threatened by, in fear of or deceived by the defendant?
- If they were, did such threats, fear or deception cause the deceased to do the act that caused their death?
- Was the act a natural consequence of the actions of the defendant, in the sense that reasonable and responsible people in the defendant’s position at the time could reasonably have foreseen the consequences?
- Did the foreseeable actions of the victim contribute in a significant way to his death?
In relation to Section 160(2)(d) of the Crimes Act 1961, give two practical examples of culpable homicide which has been caused by the victim’s actions, prompted by threats or fear or violence?
- A person who jumps or falls out of a window and dies because they think they are going to be assaulted.
- A person who jumps into a river to escape an attack and drowns.
- A person who has been assaulted and believes their life is in danger, jumps from a train and is killed.
Outline Section 163 of the Crimes Act 1961:
No one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence on the mind alone, except by wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person, nor for the killing of another by any disorder or disease arising from such influence, except by wilfully frightening any such child as aforesaid or a sick person.
In general, no one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence of the mind. What are the exceptions to this rule?
- Wilfully frightening a child under 16 years of age.
- Wilfully frightening a sick person (mentally or physically).
