Murder Flashcards
Coke’s definition of murder
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being under the King’s peace - 17th C
R v White
As homicide is a result crime, it is necessary to establish both factual and legal chain of causation. Factual causation is determined through the ‘But For’ test derived from (CASE).
R v Wallace
The legal causation is determined by actions of the defendant which are a ‘significant and operative’ cause of the death as per (CASE).
For legal causation to be established, the actions of the defendant must be…
Significant and operative
Omissions
(PRINCIPLE), a failure to act, do not lead to criminal liability unless there is a breach of duty to act.
R v Cheshire
Intervening acts may break the chain of causation if they are an overwhelming cause of death as per (CASE)
R v Blaue
The thin-skull rule from (CASE) holds the defendant liable even if the victim suffers an unexpected level of harm.
Thin-Skull
The (CONCEPT) holds the defendant liable even if the victim suffers an unexpected level of harm.
Intervening acts
(PRINCIPLE) may break the chain of causation if they are an overwhelming cause of death
R v Moloney
For there to be a mens rea of murder, an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH) must be present as per (CASE).
Mens Rea for Murder
an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH)
s.1 of the Homicide Act 1957
(ACT) states that ‘killing shall not amount to murder unless done with… malice aforethought.’
R v Cunningham
(CASE) defined ‘malice aforethought’ as an intention to kill or an intention to cause GBH. This is satisfied through either direct intent or oblique intent.
R v Duff
(CASE) claims that direct intent is satisfied if the defendant had a clear purpose to kill or cause GBH
Direct intent
R v Duff claims that (PRINCIPLE) is satisfied if the defendant had a clear purpose to kill or cause GBH
R v Woollin
(CASE) also held that where death is a virtually certain consequence of the defendant’s actions, the mens rea is present through oblique intent.
Oblique intent
R v Woollin also held that where death is a virtually certain consequence of the defendant’s actions, the mens rea is present through (CONCEPT).
Latimer v Pembliton
(CASE) held that transferred malice, where the defendant’s intent to harm one person was transferred to the actual victim, is still satisfactory to establish mens rea.
Diminished Responsibility
s.2 Homicide Act 1957
Loss of Control
s.54 and s.55 Coroners and Justice Act 2009
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being under the King’s peace - 17th C
Coke’s definition of murder
As homicide is a result crime, it is necessary to establish both factual and legal chain of causation. Factual causation is determined through the ‘But For’ test derived from (CASE).
R v White
The legal causation is determined by actions of the defendant which are a ‘significant and operative’ cause of the death as per (CASE).
R v Wallace
Significant and operative
For legal causation to be established, the actions of the defendant must be…
(PRINCIPLE) do not lead to criminal liability unless there is a breach of duty to act.
Omissions
Intervening acts may break the chain of causation if they are an overwhelming cause of death as per (CASE)
R v Cheshire
The thin-skull rule from (CASE) holds the defendant liable even if the victim suffers an unexpected level of harm.
R v Blaue
The (CONCEPT) holds the defendant liable even if the victim suffers an unexpected level of harm.
Thin-Skull
(PRINCIPLE) may break the chain of causation if they are an overwhelming cause of death
Intervening acts
For there to be a mens rea of murder, an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH) must be present as per (CASE).
R v Moloney
an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH)
Mens Rea for Murder
(ACT) states that ‘killing shall not amount to murder unless done with… malice aforethought.’
s.1 of the Homicide Act 1957
(CASE) defined ‘malice aforethought’ as an intention to kill or an intention to cause GBH, which can be satisfied through either direct intent (express malice) or oblique intent (implied malice)
R v Cunningham
(CASE) claims that direct intent is satisfied if the defendant had a clear purpose to kill or cause GBH
R v Duff
R v Duff claims that (PRINCIPLE) is satisfied if the defendant had a clear purpose to kill or cause GBH
Direct intent
(CASE) also held that where death is a virtually certain consequence of the defendant’s actions, the mens rea is present through oblique intent.
R v Woollin
R v Woollin also held that where death is a virtually certain consequence of the defendant’s actions, the mens rea is present through (CONCEPT).
Oblique intent
(CASE) held that transferred malice, where the defendant’s intent to harm one person was transferred to the actual victim, is still satisfactory to establish mens rea.
Latimer v Pembliton
s.2 Homicide Act 1957
Diminished Responsibility
s.54 and s.55 Coroners and Justice Act 2009
Loss of Control
