Intention Cases Flashcards
Date of s8 criminal justice act
1967
Legal principle from criminal justice act
The jury must look at the situation subjectively
The jury does not have to infer that d foresaw the results of his actions just because it was natural and probable
Date of moloney
1985
Legal principle from moloney
Did the jury think that the death was a natural consequence
Did d foresee death as a natural consequence of his actions
Brief facts of moloney
D shot his step father with gun after challenge, convicted of murder but quashed on appeal
Date of Hancock and shankland
1986
Legal principle of Hancock and shankland
Did the jury think death was a natural and probable consequence of d’s acts
Did D foresee death as a natural and probable consequence of his acts
Brief facts of Hancock and shankland
Miners pushed concrete onto motorway to stop miner going to work in strikes
Date of nedrick
1986
Legal principle of nedrick
Did jury think death was a virtual certainty as a consequence of D’s acts
Did D foresee death as a virtual certainty
Brief facts of nedrick
D poured paraffin through letter box and set alight killing a child.
Convicted of murder but on appeal changed to manslaughter
Date of Wollin
1998
Legal principle of woollin
Changes infer to find
Brief facts of woollin
Threw baby towards pram but hit wall and died
Convicted murder changed to manslaughter
Date of re a
2000
Legal principle from re a
Thought woollin made it do foresight of consequence was intention
Date of Matthews and alleyne
2003
Legal principle for Matthews and alleyne
Foresight does not equal intention
Brief facts of Matthews and alleyne
D dropped v into river despite him saying couldn’t swim, b drowned
Legal principle from cunliffe v goodman 1950
Intention is a state of affairs that a person does more than merely contemplate
Linked to desire
Legal principle from Mohan
Motive is irrelevant to criminal liability
Legal principle from chandler v DDP
Motive is irrelevant to criminal liability
Brief facts of chandler v DDP
D opposed to nuclear weapons and held a sit in. Convicted of breaking into a prohibited area
Case where motive and intention have been confused
R v steane
Brief facts of r v steane
Intentionally assisting the enemy by propaganda messages as if not his family would be sent to concentration camps
Put oblique intention cases into chronological order
1) s8 criminal justices act
2) moloney
3) Hancock and shankland
4) nedrick
5) Wollin
6) Re A
7) Matthews and alleyne
