Homicide Flashcards
What constitutes murder?
s. 4 Criminal Justice Act 1964
Murder is the unlawful killing, coupled with the intention to kill or seriously injure some person.
What is the actus reus for murder?
The actus reus for murder is an unlawful killing, ie, there must be no defence which makes it lawful such as self defence.
The accused’s conduct must be proven to have caused the death of the victim.
What can break causation for murder?
general
Empress Car Company A novus actus intervenus must be an extraordinary event, an ordinary event in the general run of things will not break causation.
AG v McGrath good samaratins taking the victim to the hospital in their car did not break the chain, this was an ordinary link in the chain the accused started.
**R v Roberts ** As regards the victim being injured/ killed trying to escape the test is was the reaction a natural result of what the accused said and did, in the sense that it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence?
DPP v Davis threshold for causation for murder is that the injuries caused by the accused contributed to the victims death in more than a minimal way.
When does medical intervention break the chain for causation?
DPP v Dunne only extraordinary medical negligence will break the chain.
DPP v Jordan giving the victim medicine he was on record as being allergic to was extraordinarily negligent.
R v Smith conventional treatment which as not the best treatment is not extraordinary negligence. negligence must be so overwhelming as to make the first wound merely a part of the patient’s history.
R v Cheshire a medical complication which was a direct consequence of the accused’s unlawful conduct is not a nai.
What is mens rea for murder?
The accused intended to kill or cause serious injury to another person.
DPP v Murray direct intention was described as having a fixed purpose, although in this case it was erroneously connected with a desired result.
DPP v Douglas not necessary for an intent to kill to be found to determine that the killing was the desired outcome of what was done. Presumption of intention applied for crimes of specific intent. Namely, that a man is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his own acts.
DPP v Hull it was noted that this presumption may be rebutted, for example if the act was accidental. In the context of murder specifically this was given statutory footing in s.4(1) 1964 Act.
What constitutes vehicular manslaughter?
s.52(2) Road Traffic Act 1961 Offence to drive with a lack of care or attention which a reasonably prudent driver would exercise where this results in an unlawful killing.
s.53(2) Road Traffic Act 1961 Offence to drive in a manner which a reasonably prudent driver would consider dangerous where this results in an unlawful killing.
DPP v O’Shea Neither offence requires any sort of mens rea.
What are the three types of voluntary manslaughter?
Where the accused commited an unlawful killing and had the requisite mens rea for murder but…
1) Was acting in self defence and used more force than was necessary but no more than he honestly believed to have been necessary, (AG v Dwyer)
2) Had lost his self control as a result of having been provoked, as per DPP v McNamara, or
3) Was suffering from a mental disorder that was such as to substantially diminish his responsibility for his conduct as per s. 6(1) Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006.
What are the three types of involuntary manslaughter?
Where the accused commited an unlawful killing but did not have the requisite mens rea
1) Assault with the intention to cause less than a serious injury but more than a trivial injury (assault manslaughter) R v Holzer
2) Unlawful (criminal) and dangerous (objectively likely to injure another person) act, accused does not need to be aware of the risk AG v Crosbie & Meehan
3) Criminally negligent manslaughter, negligenc which gave rise to a substantial risk of injury AG v Dunleavy
