MR - Intention Flashcards
What is meant by intention
Eg goal, aim, purpose
What are the 3 types of MR
Intention
Recklessness
Negligence
What type of MR is the most serious
Intention
What are the 2 types of intention
Direct and oblique
What is direct intention
Where D forsaw a particular result- defined in Maloney
What is oblique intention
Where It wasn’t D’s purpose to kill or seriously harm however, they knew it would inevitably lead to it
Criticisms of oblique intention
Parliament hasn’t defined it
Up to the jury wether necessary intent was present
Developed through case law
Is the test for oblique intention subjective or objective and what case does it come from
Oblique
DPP v Smith “D had intent for murder bc an ordinary person would’ve seen risk”
Where does guidance for the oblique intent come from
Statutory guidance
S.8 cja 1967
Nedrick
COA made an oblique intention test
1) how probable was the consequence
2) did D foresee the consequence as virtually certain
Which case does the test for oblique intention come from
Nedrick
What case was the Nedrick test approved in
Woolin
What is the leading case on oblique intention
Woolin
Matthews and Alleyne
Judge misdirected jury by telling them ‘if D had appreciated that pushing V into a river would be virtually certain to result in death the he MUST HAVE intended to kill’
Virtual certainty test is evidence not a definition and the jury should’ve been directed that THEY had to draw a conclusion as to wether D had intention or not
What is transferred malice
If D has the men’s rea for a crime but does the actus reus of the crime against another person than intended, D is still guilty
Latimer
D argued he had no MR to attack woman. Court said the intention for the crime against the man could be transferred onto the woman he actually attacked.
Pembliton
D threw stone intending to hit someone. Missed and hit a window, charged with criminal damage.
Conviction was quashed bc intention can’t be transferred between crimes.
What is contemporaneity
AR and MR must be present at the same time in order to be guilty
Fagan
D drove over policemans foot by accident. When he realised he turned engine off. D argued when he drove on foot he had no MR
COA said that driving on V’s foot and staying there was a continuing act. It was enough that at one point he had enough MR
Thabo meli
D tired to kill a man. Believing he was dead he pushed him off a cliff. V died at bottom of cliff. D argued when AR occurred he had no MR. Courts may treat a series of acts as one transaction if the men’s rea was present at any time then it coincides with AR
