Homicide & related offences Flashcards
Murder - Types & Elements
- Section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1964
- Section 3 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990
- Intention
- Unlawfulness
Section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1964
- Where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not be murder unless the accused person intended to kill, or cause serious injury to, some person, whether the person actually killed or not.
- The accused person shall be presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of his conduct; but this presumption may be rebutted.
Murder - Intention
- Must prove the purpose was to kill or cause serious injury.
- Not enough that there was a risk.
- The prosecution must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the presumption of intention has not been rebutted (DPP v. McBride)
Unlawfulness - Defences
Self-defense and necessity of circumstances may render intentional killing not unlawful.
Murder under s 3
Section 3 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990
Same ingredients as murder, but requires aggravating factors:
1. The murder of an on-duty guard or prison officer.
1. Foreign diplomat, head of state, or member of government, for political motives.
1. Committed in the course of terrorist-related or gangland-related activity.
S 3(2)(a): Requires knowledge of, or recklessness as to, the aggravating factor
Manslaughter - Types
Voluntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter
* Assault Manslaughter
* Criminal and Dangerous Act Manslaughter
* Criminal-negligence Manslaughter
Voluntary manslaughter
The accused intended to kill or cause serious injury, but:
* Acting in self-defence, used more force than necessary, but no more than they honestly believed to be necessary.
* Was provoked
* Suffered from a mental disability that diminished his responsibility
Involuntary manslaughter
The accused did not intend to kill, or cause serious injury.
* Assault Manslaughter
* Criminal and Dangerous Act Manslaughter
* Criminal-negligence Manslaughter
Assault Manslaughter
If the accused causes the victim’s death by assaulting them.
* Accused assaulted the victim
* The assault caused victim’s death
* The accused, at the time of the assault, intended to cause less than serious injury but more than trivial or negligible injury (R v. Holzer)
Criminal and Dangerous Act Manslaughter
Accused caused victim’s death while intentionally committed a crime that is dangerous
- DPP v. Horgan
- AG v. Crosbie
- Attorney General’s Reference (No. 3 of 1994)
Test in DPP v. Horgan
- The act causes death is a crime and poses the risk of bodily harm to another;
- An ordinary reasonable person would consider the act to be dangerous, that is, likely to cause bodily harm;
- ‘Dangerousness’ is to be judged objectively
AG v. Crosbie
It doesn’t have to be proved that the accused knew the conduct would likely cause death or serious injury. It must be judged by objective standards.
Attorney General’s Reference No. 3 of 1994
- The criminal and dangerous act need not have been aimed at the deceased.
- The accused stabbed a woman, causing the child’s death. It did not matter that the act was not aimed at the unborn.
Criminal-negligence Manslaughter
If the accused causes the victim’s death by criminally negligent conduct. Criminal negligence is an extremely high standard
* AG v. Dunleavy
* DPP v. Cullagh
AG v. Dunleavy
- Vehicular manslaughter. The accused had knocked down and killed a cyclist while driving, albeit slowly, late at night without lights and on the wrong side of the road. The conviction for manslaughter was quashed.
- Held that criminal-negligence requires a high degree of risk or likelihood of substantial personal injury to others.
- It does not have to be proved that the accused was aware of such risk or likelihood.
DPP v. Cullagh
Accused owned and operated a chairoplane at a funfair. Due to a rusty bolt, which he didn’t know about, a chair detached during a ride, causing a woman’s death. He was found guilty of manslaughter
Dangerous driving
- Section 53 of the Road Traffic Act 1961
- AG v. Quinlan
- AG v. Dunleavy
Section 53 of the Road Traffic Act 1961
A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place in a manner which, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, is dangerous to the public.
S 53(3): it is not a defence to show that the speed was not in excess of a speed limit
AG v. Quinlan & AG v. Dunleavy
AG v. Quinlan:
* “driving in a manner in which a reasonably prudent motorist, having regard to all the circumstances, would clearly recognise as involving a direct and serious risk of harm to the public.”
AG v. Dunleavy
* The standard of this negligence is lower than criminal negligence but higher than “ordinary carelessness”.
Careless driving
Section 52 of the Road Traffic Act 1961
* A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention.
AG v. Dunleavy
* The prosecution must prove “ordinary carelessness” to secure a conviction for this offence.
S 53(3): it is not a defence to show that the speed was not in excess of a speed limit
Infanticide
- The killing of a child under the age of 12 months by their mentally imbalanced mother may be infanticide.
- A woman (and only woman) can be guilty of infanticide even if she intended to kill or seriously injure the child.
Suicide
Section 2(2) of the Criminal Law (Suicide) Act 1993
* A person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the suicide of another, or an attempt by another to commit suicide, is guilty of an offence.
