murder Flashcards
who defined the law on murder
lord coke
what kind of offence is murder
it is a common law offence
what is a common law offence
it was set by judges and not by the government
what are the two sections that murder is
result crime
indictable offence
what is a result crime
always ends with a death of a another person
what is an indictable offence
the trail will go to crown court and if found guilty they will have a mandatory life sentence
what did lord coke say
“the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under the kings peace with malice aforethought express or implied’
what are the different sections of the actus reus of murder
unlawful killing
reasonable creature in being
kings peace
definition of actus reus
any action or conduct which causes death
what is an unlawful killing
positive voluntary act or an omission (failure to act)
what is the case related to unlawful killing (omission)
R v Gibbons and procter
what is the case of R v gibbons and Procter
gibbons and his partner Procter neglected and starved the victim, the victim died of starvation, rightly convicted of murder
what is the meaning of reasonable creature in being
not a reasonable creature in being is when it is a feotus or the brain stem is dead
what case relates to reasonable creature in being
AG’S Ref No 3 of 1994
what is the case AG’S Ref No 3 of 1994 relating to reasonable creature in being
said that if the baby is a feotus then they aren’t a reasonable person in being
what does kings peace mean
if there is war it is lawful to kill
what are the two sections of causation
factual
legal
what is factual causation
is the but for test, this means but for someone doing an act would the condition of the victim change
what are the cases that relate to factual causation
r v white
r v pagett
r v smith
what is the case related to the but for test
R v White- defendant put poison into the drink of the victim, hit mother, with the intention of killing her, the victim drank a few sips of the drink and then fell asleep, the medical evidence was that she died from a heart attack rather a result of the poison
what is the case related to the minimise test
R v Pagett- police trying to arrest man and he used a pregnant women as a human shield, officer returned fire and killed the woman at trail the defendant was not guilty of murder but was convicted of manslaughter which he appealed .
what is the case related to operating and substantial cause
R v Smith- solider was stabbed in army barracks, he was dropped twice when being taken to the medical tent, he then received negligent medical treatment, the medics failed to diagnose a puncture to his lung, the victim died, the defendant was charged with murder and convicted at first instance, the defendant appealed on the basis that the victim would have survived but for the negligence of those treating him.
what is legal causation
- the defendant should also be de minimise test this is when the defendant must be more than minimal cause of death
- the defendant must also be the operating and substantial cause of death
-the chain of causation
the sections include- - novus actus intervenieus
- switching off life support does not break the chain of causation
- thin skull rule does not break the chain of causation
what are the different sections of acts interventiens
-actions of the victim
-palpably wrong medical
-actions of a third party which arena independent of defendants actions and so unforeseeable
- natural but unpredictable event
what are the cases for actions of the victim
R v Williams
R v Roberts
R v Dear
what happens in the case R v Williams
defendant took the victim home in a car, the defendant began making sexual advances towards the victim which were rejected before attempting to pull off her coat, the victim then opened the door and jumped out of the moving vehicle sustaining injuries as a result the defendant was charged with sexual assault
what is the case for palpably wrong medical treatment
R v Jordan
what happens in the case r v Jordan relating to palpably wrong medical treatment
Jordan who worked for the United States Air Force stabbed a man as the result of a disturbance, the victim died in hospital eight days later, the post Morton found that the victim died of broncho following the abdominal injury, the court in the first instance found Jordan guilty
what is the case for actions of the third party
r v chesire
what happens in the case r v Cheshire relating to actions of the third party
chesire shot a man during the course of an argument, the victim was taken to hospital to have surgery and shortly after developed breathing problems, doctors inserted a tracheotomy tube, improved the victims condition, he soon died afterwards, the victims windpipe had narrowed near the location where the pipe had been inserted , chesire was charged with murder
what does natural but unpredictable events do to the chain of causation
breaks chain
what is the case for switching of the life support do to the chain of causation
R v Malchereki and Steele
what happens in the case of r v malchereki and Steele relating to switching off the life support
mancherei stabbed his wife in the stomach, she was treated for the wound and a few days later she collapsed in hospital, she had surgery to remove a blood clot during this her heart stopped beating for thirty mins and caused he victim to have brain damage she was placed on life support, the life support was switched off because their was no chance of her improving, this didn’t break the chain of causation
what is the case for the thin skull rule
R v Balue
what happens in the case R V Balue relating to the thin skull rule
after the victim refused the defendants sexual advance the defendant stabbed the victim four times, victim was admitted to hospital she required medical treatment which involved a blood transfusion, the victim had views on accepting blood transfusion, she dies because she refused the transfusion, the defendant was charged with manslaughter by way of diminished responsibility.
what is the mens rea of murder
there is intention to kill and intention to cause GBH, they express malice and implied malice aforethought
what’s is the meaning of express malice
means there was direct intention ‘death was D’s aim objective and purpose’ there was also oblique intention
what’s the case relates to express malice
r v Matthews and alleyne
what happens in the case r v Matthews and allenyne relating to express of malice
D’s threw the victim into a river, who drowned and died, D argued although they knew the victim could don’t swim, they did not intent for the victim to die, the judge gave the direction to the jury that it must find d guilty of murder if they found that they had foresight that the victim was virtually certain to die or suffer serious harm
what is the meaning of implied malice aforethought
there was direct intention to cause GBH, was the D’s main aim and the actions were certain to cause that, object and purpose
what is the case for implied malice aforethought
R v Cunningham
what happens in the case R v Cunningham relating to implied malice aforethought
D attacked V in a pub wrongly believing that the victim had sexual relations with his wife, V suffered a fractured skull and subdural haemorrhage from which he died 7 days later
what needs to be included in the conclusion for the exam
constructive intent
mandatory life sentence
duress
what does constructive intent mean for the conclusion
D is guilty of murder where he did not intent murder, but only intended GBH
what does mandatory life sentence for the conclusion
if D is found guilty, there is not option other than the mandatory life sentence
what does duress mean for the conclusion
duress is not a defence to murder, which can be unfair as D may not have acted unless his life was threatened
