Fatal offences Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Definition of murder (Edward Coke)

A

Unlawful killing of a human being under the King’s peace with malice aforethought

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

AR of murder

A
  1. Unlawful
  2. Killing
  3. Human being
  4. King’s peace
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Unlawful (murder)

A

Not in self defence

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

Rance

A

Unlawful element of the AR of murder

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

Killing

A

Brain dead can amount to dead

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

Human being (murder)

A

Fully expelled from their mother

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

Rance

A

Human being (murder)

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

King’s peace (murder)

A

Not killed during war time

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

MR of murder

A

Direct or oblique intention to cause GBH or death

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

Express malice aforethought

A

Intention to kill

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

Implied malice aforethought

A

Intention to cause GBH

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

s.2 Homicide Act 1957

A

Diminished responsibility

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

s.54 Coroners & Justice Act 2009

A

Loss of control

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

Four elements of diminished responsibility

A
  1. Abnormality of mental functioning
  2. Arose from a recognized medical condition
  3. Substantially impairs D’s ability to…
  4. Provides an explanation for D’s conduct
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

R v Byrne

A

Abnormality of metal functioning is a state of mental functioning a reasonable person would find abnormal

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

Substantially impair’s Ds ability to (diminished responsibility)

A
  1. Understand nature of their conduct
  2. Form a rational judgement
  3. Exercise self control
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

R v King (Diminished responsibility)

A

Provides an explanation for the defendant’s conduct

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

Di Duca

A

Intoxication alone can not amount to diminished responsibility

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

R v Dietschmann

A

Intoxication and pre-existing abnormality of mental functioning

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

Intoxication and pre-existing abnormality of mental functioning

A

Jury must decide if D would have acted in the same way if they were not intoxicated

21
Q

Tandy

A

Alcoholism can amount to an abnormality of mental functioning

22
Q

R v Wood

A

Intoxication due to addiction

23
Q

Three elements of loss of control

A
  1. Loss of control
  2. Caused by a qualifying trigger
  3. Someone of the same age and sex as D would have acted in the same way
24
Q

Loss of control definition

A

Acting without careful thought

25
Q

R v Ahluwalia

A

Loss of control does not have to be sudden

26
Q

Qualifying triggers

A
  1. Fear of violence
  2. Things said or done
27
Q

Things said or done tests

A
  1. Extremely grave character
  2. Gives D a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged
28
Q

R v Doughty

A

Things said or done

29
Q

s.55 of the coroners and justice act

A

Sets out the two qualifying triggers for loss of control

30
Q

Excluded triggers

A

Sexual infidelity and revenge

31
Q

Clinton

A

Sexual infidelity is not a qualifying trigger

32
Q

Mohammed

A

Anger management issued will not be considered when assessing the defence of loss of control

33
Q

R v Hill

A

Other circumstances of D can be taken into consideration in deciding whether such a ‘normal’ person might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D in those circumstances

34
Q

Van Dogen

A

Someone of the same age and sex would have acted in the same or similar way to the defendant

35
Q

AR of unlawful act manslaughter

A
  1. Unlawful act
  2. Act must be dangerous
  3. Act must cause death
36
Q

Unlawful act (UAM)

A

The main question you have to ask here is – if the victim had not died - would D’s act be criminal?

37
Q

R v Lamb (UAM)

A

There must be an unlawful act

38
Q

R v Lowe

A

An omission is not sufficient to satisfy the AR of unlawful act manslaughter

39
Q

R v Larkin (UAM)

A

The unlawful act must be dangerous

40
Q

R v Church (UAM)

A

A dangerous act - it must be an act that a sober and reasonable man would regard as dangerous.”

41
Q

R v Kennedy (UAM)

A

If V had injected themselves with drugs provided by D and then dies, this will not amount to UAM. If D inject V with drugs and V dies, this amounts to UAM.

42
Q

MR of unlawful act manslaughter

A

The case of Newbury and Jones stated that the mens rea of unlawful act manslaughter is the mens rea of the unlawful act itself

43
Q

Newbury and Jones

A

The MR of UAM is the MR of the unlawful act

44
Q

AR of gross negligence manslaughter

A
  1. Risk of death
  2. Duty of Care
  3. Breach of Duty
  4. Causing Death
45
Q

GNM Duty of care

A

Either Caparo/Robinson/Omission

46
Q

MR of gross negligence manslaughter

A

Gross negligence

47
Q

R v Bateman (GNM)

A

Gross negligence is showing “such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the State and conduct deserving punishment”.

48
Q

Adomako (GNM)

A

Lord Mackay extended the definition of “gross negligence” and suggested that ‘gross negligence is “conduct so bad in all the circumstances as to amount to a criminal act or omission.”