Homicide-Related Offences

Question 1

What is infanticide? - s178 CA61

Answer 1

Answer:
Where a woman causes the death of any child of hers under the age of 10 years in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide and where at the time of the offence
the balance of her mind is disturbed, by reason of her not having fully recovered from childbirth of that or any child
or by reason of lactation or any disorder consequent upon childbirth,
to such an extent that she could not be held fully responsible,
she is guilty of infanticide and not murder or manslaughter

Question 2

What is the section and penalty for infanticide?

Answer 2

Answer:

Section 178 Crimes Act 1961. 3 years maximum imprisonment.

Question 3

What must be proved in the offence of infanticide?

Answer 3

Answer:
The killing of the child must be in a manner that would amount to culpable homicide
Proof that the mothers mind was disturbed as a consequence of the birth of that child or another child.
The term “as a consequence” includes the period of lactation

Question 4

What must a jury decide for the conviction of infanticide?

Answer 4

Answer:
If a woman is charged with murder or manslaughter but the jury believes her state of mind is due to the effects of childbirth the jury is required to return a special verdict of acquittal on account of insanity caused by childbirth.
In charges of infanticide it is for the jury to decide on a mothers state of mind

Question 5

What do sections 151, 152 and 153 CA61 cover?

Answer 5

Answer:
They concern the duty to provide those things and conditions necessary to sustain life and protect from injury.

Death resulting from failure to meet the legal duty to provide the necessities of life and or protection from injury can amount to homicide.

Question 6

What are the elements of s151 CA61? - Duty to provide the necessaries and protect from injury?

Answer 6

Answer:
Everyone who

Has care or charge of a person who is a vulnerable adult who is unable to provide for himself or herself with necessaries

Is under a legal duty to provide that person with necessaries and to take reasonable steps to protect that person from injury

Question 7

What are the elements of s152(1) CA61? - Duty of a parent or guardian to provide necessaries and protect from injury

Answer 7

Answer:
Everyone who is a parent or is a person in place of a parent
Who has actual care or charge of a child under the age of 18 years
Is under a legal duty to provide that child with the necessaries and to take reasonable steps to protect that child from injury

Question 8

What are the elements of s153(1) CA61 - Duty of employers to provide necessaries?

Answer 8

Answer:
Everyone who
as an employer has contracted to provide necessary food, clothing or lodging for any servant or apprentice under the age of 16 years
Is under a legal duty to provide the same, and criminally responsible for omitting without lawful excuse to perform such duty if the death of that servant or apprentice is caused or
if his life is endangered or his health permanently injured by such omission

Question 9

What is meant by the term “vulnerable adult?”

Hint: I. S. M. A. D

Answer 9

Answer:
Means a person unable, by reason of Impairment, Sickness, Mental , Age, Detention, or any other cause
to withdraw himself or herself from the care or charge of another person

I. S. M. A. D

Question 10

What is meant by necessaries?

Answer 10

Answer:
Under s151(1) it may encompass commodities and services necessary to sustain life, such as food, clothing, housing, warmth and medical care

Question 11

What is meant by duty to protect from injury?

Answer 11

Answer:
In this context injury encompasses not only bodily harm directly caused by other persons but also harm arising from human activities and non-human sources

Question 12

What does s154 CA61 - Abandoning a child under 6 relate to?

Does s150A apply to s154?

Answer 12

Answer:
Everyone who unlawfully abandons or exposes any child under the age of six.
Penalty is imprisonment max 7 years

Answer:
No. The standard of care required of person under legal duties or performing unlawful acts does not apply.

Question 13

Under s155 CA61 - Duty of person doing dangerous acts, What is covered?

Answer 13

Answer:
Anyone who undertakes to administer surgical or medical treatment or do any lawful act the doing of which will be dangerous to life
Under legal duty to have and use reasonable knowledge and skill and care in doing such act
Criminally responsible for the consequences of omitting without lawful excuse to discharge that duty

Question 14

Under s156 CA61 - Duty of person in charge of dangerous things, What is covered?

Answer 14

Answer:
Any one who has in his charge or under his control anything whatever , whether animate or inanimate, who erects, makes, operates or maintains anything whatever
which in the absence of precaution or care may endanger human life is under a legal duty to take reasonable precautions against and to use reasonable care to avoid such danger
Criminally responsible for the consequences of omitting without lawful excuse to discharge that duty

Question 15

In relation to section 156 of the crimes act 1961 what is meant by the term anything whatever?

Answer 15

Answer:

It includes such things as motor vehicles, trains, animals, ships, weapons, machinery and explosives.

Question 16

What does section 157 of the crimes act 1961 cover?

Answer 16

Answer:
Everyone who undertakes to do any act the omission to do which is or may be dangerous to life is under a legal duty to do that act and is criminally responsible for the consequences of omitting without lawful excuse to discharge that duty.

Question 17

Section 163 of the crimes act 1961 concern is killing someone by influencing their mind. What does this mean?

Answer 17

Answer:
This means if somebody was driven into an extreme anxiety state by work or domestic pressures but had no previous mental or physical ailment and committed suicide the person causing the anxiety would not be culpable for their death.

Question 18

What does section 164 CA61 deal with?

Answer 18

Answer:
This is where death may have been accelerated by another’s actions that causes the death of another person kills a person although the effect of the bodily injury caused to that person was merely to hasten his death while laboring under some disorder or disease arising from some other cause.

Question 19

What does section 165 of the crimes at 1961 cover?

Answer 19

Answer:
It imposes a liability on a person who is responsible for a death if an injury inflicted by him is an operative cause of death (directly or through some secondary conditions such as tetanus), even though it could’ve been prevented with proper treatment

Question 20

What does section 166 of the crimes act 1961 make provision for?

Answer 20

Answer:
Section 166 covers situations where a person dangerously injures the victim and as a result treatment is administered to the victim and the treatment is the immediate cause of the victim’s death.

The person who caused the injury is liable for the injury and its consequences. The degree of liability rests in the mens rea element

Question 21

A victim is shot by person A and goes to hospital. The doctor treats the victim mediocrely and the victim dies. Who is liable for the death?

Answer 21

Answer:
When treatment is sort for an injury and the injured person dies the person who caused the original injury is liable for the death even if the person has died as a result of improper treatment so long as a treatment was applied in good faith.

Liability of practitioners covered by s155. Gross negligence set out in s150A

Question 22

What was found in R v Tarei in relation to the withdrawal of life support?

Answer 22

Answer:
The court held that the withdrawal of any form of life support system is not treatment under section 166 Crimes Act 1961.

To withdraw life-support does not cause death but removes the possibility of extending the persons life through artificial means.

Question 23

What two rules did the court in an English matter R v Jordan provide in relation to the aggressor not being held liable for the ultimate death?

Answer 23

Answer:
The English Court of Appeals stated two rules:

• death resulting from any normal treatment employed to deal with a felonious injury may be regarded as caused by the injury;
• in other circumstances it is a question of fact to establish a casual connection between the death and the felonious injury

In Jordan the treatment of the patient being given a drug to treat a stab wound that he was allergic to and ultimately caused the death was not normal.

The jury quashed the conviction as the treatment was so unusual it broke the casual chain. Novus actus was upheld.

Question 24

What does novus actus interviens refer to?

Answer 24

Answer:

It refers to an intervening act that breaks the chain of causation.

Question 25

Give 2 examples where s166 may apply.

Answer 25

Answer:
A victim is severely kicked by the defendant. A surgeon gave the victim a drug that caused a allergic reaction. It was suggested to be the immediate cause of death. However, the court held this did not affect the defendants criminal responsibility.

A person was wounded in a duel and died as a result of the surgery required because of the wound. The person who inflicted the wound was guilty of murder.