Fatal Offences Flashcards
What is murder?
Unlawful killing of a reasonable person with malice, as defined by 17th century judge Lord Coke. It is a common law offence not defined in any act of parliament.
What is the Actus Reus of murder?
- V is killed (R v Malcherek confirms brain stem as the current medical term for death).
- Of a reasonable creature in being (Foetus cannot be murdered; AG’s Reference (1997) states that a child being born alive and then dying is murder).
- Under the King’s Peace (killing of an enemy in war is not murder).
- The killing was unlawful (the D does not have a defence).
- Can be an act or omission (Defendant must be at least 10 years old and sane).Stephen J
What are the exceptions to the rule that an omission cannot make someone liable for an offence?
- Contractual duty (e.g., R v Pittwood).
- Duty due to a relationship (e.g., R v Gibbins and Proctor).
- Voluntarily undertaken duty (e.g., R v Stone and Dobinson).
- Duty through official position (e.g., R v Dytham).
- Duty arising from a chain of events (e.g., R v Miller).
What is Factual Cause in the context of Actus Reus?
D can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened but for the D’s conduct, known as the ‘but for’ test (R v Pagett).
What is Legal Cause?
D will be guilty if his conduct was more than a minimal cause, even if there are other acts by other people leading to the consequence (R v Kimsey).
What is the Thin-Skull Rule?
The D must take the V as he finds them (R v Blaue).
What are Intervening Acts?
There must be a direct link from the D’s conduct to the consequence; an intervening act interrupts the chain of causation.
What constitutes an intervening act?
- An act of a 3rd party (independent and serious).
- V’s own act (unforeseeable act is an intervening act, R v Williams; foreseeable reaction is not, R v Roberts).
- A natural but unpredictable event.
- V’s self-neglect or suicide (R v Wallace).
- Medical treatment (R v Smith is not an intervening act; R v Jordan is).
What is the Mens Rea for murder?
The mens rea for murder is with Malice Aforethought, either express or implied (R v Inglis).
What is Direct Intention?
Defined by Mohan as ‘the decision to bring about the prohibited consequence’.
What are the two types of intention for murder?
- Express malice aforethought (intention to kill, Moloney).
- Implied malice aforethought (intention to do grievous bodily harm, R v Vickers).
What is Oblique Intention?
When the D intends one consequence but another (murder) occurs, known as Foresight of consequences (R v Woolin).
What is the Transferred Malice Rule?
D could be guilty if he intended to commit a similar crime against a different victim (Latimer). The mens rea established on person A is transferred to person B. However, the MR for one offence cannot be transferred to a different offence (Pembilton).
What is the Coincidence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea Rule?
The actus reus and mens rea elements of a crime must occur at the same time, with an exception for the transaction theory (Thabo Meli).
What is the Continuing Act Rule?
Where there is a continuing act of the actus reus and at some point the mens rea is present, then there is a crime (e.g., Fagan).
What type of defences are loss of control and diminished responsibility?
They are partial defences available only to murder, reducing the charge to manslaughter.
What is the first requirement for loss of control under S54 (1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?
D must have lost self-control.
What must there be for the loss of control defence to be successful?
A qualifying trigger.
What is the ‘normal person test’ in the context of loss of control?
A person of the same age and sex would have reacted in the same way.
In R v Jewell, what factors were deemed insufficient for a loss of self-control?
Being tired, depressed, and unable to think straight.
Is the loss of self-control required to be sudden for the defence to succeed?
No, it does not need to be sudden.
Under what condition is the loss of control defence not available?
If D is acting out of revenge.
What are the two qualifying triggers for loss of control under S55 (3)?
- A fear of serious violence from the victim or another identified person
- A thing or things done or said which caused D to have a justifiable sense of being wronged.
What does S55 (6)(a) state regarding incited violence?
D cannot rely on the first qualifying trigger if they have incited the violence.
What must the circumstances be for there to be a qualifying trigger under R v Hatter?
The circumstances must be extremely grave.
What does S55 (6) state about self-induced loss of control?
There is no qualifying trigger if the loss of control is self-induced.
Is sexual infidelity considered a qualifying trigger?
No, as established in Clinton.
What are the factors considered in the normal person test?
- Age
- Sex
- Circumstances of D.
What personal characteristics are relevant in the normal person test according to R v Holley?
Only sex, age, and circumstances relevant to D.
What circumstances might be considered in the normal person test?
- Depression
- Epilepsy
- History of sexual abuse.
What circumstance is explicitly excluded from the normal person test?
Voluntary intoxication.
What must a person suffering from diminished responsibility demonstrate under S2 (1) Homicide Act?
They must be suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning.
What are the three criteria for diminished responsibility under S2 (1) Homicide Act?
- Arose from a medical condition
- Substantially impaired D’s ability to understand the nature of his conduct, form a rational judgement, or exercise self-control
- Provides an explanation as to why D killed.
What does the term ‘abnormality of mental functioning’ imply according to Byrne?
D’s mental functioning was so different that a reasonable man would declare it abnormal.
What must the abnormality provide according to the criteria for diminished responsibility?
An explanation for D’s acts.
What does S52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 require regarding the medical condition?
The abnormality must arise from a medical condition.
What types of conditions fall under the definition of a medical condition?
- Psychological conditions
- Physical conditions.
What case confirmed that learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorders are included in medical conditions?
Jama.
What does ‘substantially impaired’ mean according to R v Lloyd?
It does not mean total but does not mean minimal.
What does ‘understand the nature of his conduct’ cover in diminished responsibility?
Situations where D is in an automatic state and does not know what they are doing.
What conditions may prevent someone from forming a rational judgement?
- Schizophrenia
- Battered wife syndrome.
What case illustrates an inability to exercise self-control due to mental abnormality?
R v Bryne.
What is the causal relationship required for diminished responsibility?
The mental abnormality must cause the conduct.
What is the key requirement for using the diminished responsibility defence while intoxicated according to Dietschmann?
There must be a recognised medical condition causing the abnormality.
Is intoxication by itself considered a recognised medical condition?
No.
What is considered a recognised medical condition in R v Wood?
Alcohol Dependency Syndrome.
What is involuntary manslaughter due to gross negligence?
It is committed when the D owes the victim a duty of care but breaches that duty in a very negligent way.
What type of negligence is required for gross negligence manslaughter?
Criminal negligence.
What are the four elements of gross negligence manslaughter from R v Adomako?
- Existence of a duty of care by the D to the V
- A breach of that duty that causes death
- Gross negligence which the jury considers to be so bad as to be criminal
- Risk of death from D’s conduct
What is an example of a duty of care?
Doctor to patient.
What case established the ordinary principles in the civil law of tort related to duty of care?
Caparo v Dickman.
In R v Singh, what relationship establishes a duty of care?
Between a landlord and its tenants.
In R v Litchfield, what relationship establishes a duty of care?
Between a ship captain and the passengers.
What is the ‘but for’ test in the context of causation?
D can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened but for the D’s conduct.
What does R v Pagett illustrate?
The application of the ‘but for’ test.
What is required for legal causation?
D’s conduct must be more than a minimal cause.
What does the Thin-Skull Rule state?
The D must take the V as he finds them.
Which case provides an example of the Thin-Skull Rule?
R v Blaue.
What is an intervening act in the context of causation?
An act that interrupts the chain of causation, meaning D is not guilty.
In R v Smith, was there an intervening act?
No, because death was still possible from original conduct.
In R v Jordan, was there an intervening act?
Yes, the act caused the death.
Do life support machines being switched off break the chain of causation?
No, as established in R v Malcherek.
What is required for gross negligence to be considered criminal?
The negligence must be gross.
What does R v Bateman explain about gross negligence?
It is a disregard for life and the safety of others.
What does involuntary manslaughter due to unlawful act entail?
It is an unlawful killing where the D does not intend to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
What is another term for involuntary manslaughter due to unlawful act?
Constructive manslaughter.
What must the D do for unlawful act manslaughter?
The D must do an unlawful act and have the required mens rea.
What case illustrates that an omission cannot be an unlawful act?
R v Lamb.
What is the objective test for dangerousness in unlawful act manslaughter?
All sober and reasonable people must realize some risk of harm.
Which case established the objective test for dangerousness?
R v Church.
What is the legal definition of an unlawful act?
It must be a criminal act, not a civil act.
What does R v Newbury clarify about mens rea?
It must be proved that the D had the necessary mens rea for the unlawful act.
What is the significance of R v Dawson in terms of unlawful act manslaughter?
Fear and apprehension alone are not sufficient for dangerousness.
What happens if the unlawful act did not cause the death?
The D is not liable for manslaughter.
What is the test for intervening acts regarding a third party?
The act must be independent of the D and sufficiently serious.
What is the effect of a natural but unpredictable event on causation?
It can interrupt the chain of causation.
What does R v Dalby illustrate regarding drug supply?
If the D supplies drugs but does not inject them, the chain of causation is broken.
What does R v Cato illustrate regarding drug supply and injection?
If the D supplies and injects the drugs, the chain of causation is not broken.
