Intervening Acts

Question 1

Acceleration principle

Answer 1

If defendants conduct substantially accelerated death

Question 2

Case for the victim would have died anyway accelerated principle

Answer 2

Adams

Doctor gave over dose of pain killers to terminally ill patient

Question 3

The actions of a third party

Answer 3

Where death is not directly linked to defendant

Question 4

Case for actions of a third party

Answer 4

R v Pagett
Human body shield which police shot which Pagett caused as shot involuntarily in self defence
NAI caused prohibited action but defendants action brought about NAI

Question 5

Flight cases

Answer 5

R v Pitts

Escaped violent assault by jumping in river and killing herself, but victims action considered reasonable

Question 6

What is reasonably foreseeable in flight cases

Answer 6

If victim had little choice the chain would be intact

However if the victims actions were unforseeable the chain would be broken

Question 7

Case which said if the action was so daft no reasonable person would have contemplated it in flight cases

Answer 7

R v Roberts

Jumped out of car to avoid sexual advances her actions were reasonable and proportionate

Question 8

Flight case of marjoram showed reasonable actions

Answer 8

Marjoram
Group kicked hostel door and jumped out window, d convicted gbh as reasonably foreseeable that v would fear violence and was only escape route

Question 9

Fright case

Answer 9

R v mackie

Frighten son and fell down stairs and was killed

Question 10

For fright cases of the action was reasonably foreseeable the defendant is the

Answer 10

Legal cause

Question 11

Medical negligence cases

Answer 11

R v Jordan
Victim stabbed by Jordan, died 8 days later in hospital, d convicted murder
Treatment in hospital negligent as drug was allergic which he died of and stab wounds healed
Jordan acquitted

Question 12

Another medical negligence case

Answer 12

R v smith
V stabbed doctor failed to realise seriousness and poor treatment and died
Smith convicted
Wound was still operating and substantial cause as had not healed
Operating means still being treated

Question 13

R v Cheshire medical negligence

Answer 13

V shot in stomach in December
Major surgery in February and had breathing difficulties
Tube in throat
Died from breathing difficulties
Gun shot wounds no longer life threatening

Question 14

What two tests came out of r v Cheshire

Answer 14

Negligent treatment was so independent of defendants actions. And
The negligent treatment was so potent in causing death that Cheshire’s actions were insignificant

Question 15

Life support machine case in medical negligence

Answer 15

R v malcherek
D stabbed wife, doctors turned off life support hence NAI, injuries still operating and substantial,
If doctor switches off life support of brain dead he does not break chain of causation

Question 16

Medical negligence m v McKechnie

Answer 16

Victim could not receive treatment for a pre existing condition because of injuries inflicted by defendant

Question 17

What did r v McKechnie happen

Answer 17

McKechnie cause severe head injury, admitted to hospital suffering from ulcer did not operate because of head injurie, died because of ulcer burst
Died and McKechnie convicted of manslaughter upheld because chain still intact because was not operated because of head injury

Question 18

Victim has pre existing medical condition or was to blame for refusing medical treatment
Thin skin rule: take your victim as you take him

Answer 18

R v Blaue
Attacked women and pierced her lung refused blood transfusion because religion, convicted as must take victim as find him, and death cause by stab wounds he called

Question 19

Self neglect

Answer 19

If v mistreats or neglects his own injuries his will not break chain causation

Question 20

Self neglect case

Answer 20

Dear
Slashed with knive
D refused treatment and possibly made worse, murder as wounds were significant cause

Question 21

Voluntary acts case

Answer 21

Kennedy

Drug dealer prepared heroin and gave v syringe. V injected and died, d convicted of manslaughter,

Question 22

Scottish voluntary acts case

Answer 22

MacAngus and Kane v HM advocate

V self ingestion of drugs did not break chain of causation

Question 23

When can an NAI allow no criminal liability

Answer 23

If it breaks the chain of causation as he will not have caused prohibited consequence