Murder Flashcards
What is murder?
Common law definition
This is the unlawful killing of a person under the kings peace with the intention to kill or cause GBH.
Who had given this definition?
Lord Coke 1797
What is the AR and MR for murder?
Actus Reus: Unlawful killing of another being under the kings peace
Mens Rea: The intention to kill or cause GBH
What is the first element to Murder?
Include Omission Case
- Defendent killed:
In order to prove that D is guilty, it must prove that their act or omission caused the death of V.
Gibbons v Proctor (1918)
What must be established to prove the D’s acts caused the death of V?
What are the types of causation? ( include cases )
A chain of causation
Legal Causation: De miniimus
Factual Causation: But for test, R v White
Legal Causation: De Minimus Principle, R v Paggett
What is Factual Causation?
Factual causation states if it was not but for the actions of the defendant ,the result would not have occured.
In what case was Factual causation established?
R v White
A son had attempted to poison his mother, however she had died via a heart attack prior to the poisoning.
The son was charged with attempted murder, as he was not the factual cause.
What is Legal causation?
Which case was it established in?
Legal cuasation is closely related to moral responsibilty, can the result be fairly said to be the fault of defendant.
- Meaning even if the D is not the factual cause he can still be found liable
- R v Pagget - D used his gf as a human shield when police were shooting at him, this had resulted in the death of the girl.
What is the De minimus principle in relation to legal causation?
In order to avoid situations such as Paggett, where the D may not be the factual cause of death, we use the de minimus principle.
This means that even if D isnt the sole cause of death, he is still a cause of death, and will be held liable for the death of V.
What is the break in the chain of cuasation called?
A Novus actus intervenus
Actions of a third party
What is medical negligence?
Outline the principles of cases involved
Where D inflicts injury which will cuase the V to require medical attention, will D be liable for murder or manslaughter if the medical treatment is improper.
R v Smith: D is liable if injuries are still the operating and substantial cause of death
R v Cheshire: Medical treatment only breaks the chain of causation in extraordinary and unusual cases
R v Jordan: When medical negligence is so exteme ‘palpably wrong’ that it can relieve D of liability
What are the 2 main Novus actus intervenus in criminal law?
- Actions of third party
- Victims own acts
Actions of third party
Outline the dilema on Life support machines.
Outline principles of the cases involved
Who should be liable for the death of V if a doctor turns off a life support machine for a V who has ended up in such state due to D’s actions.
R v Malcherek: Brain death is legal death
NHS v Bland: Permanent vegatative state
What is the thin skull rule?
This rule states you take your victims as you find them. Therefore, if the D causes the victim injuries, but the V’s injuries worsen because of pre-existing condition they have, the D will still be liable.
R v Blaue - V rejected a blood transfussion which would have saved V’s life, but due to religous reasons she had refused and died, D was still liable.
Victims own act
Outline victims own act in relation to NAI.
If the D causes the V to act in a forseeable way, then any injury to the V will be considered to have been caused by the defendant.
However:
If the V does something daft or unexpected that is not forseeable, then this may act as a novus actus intervenus and break the chain of causation.
R v Roberts: Introduced the daftness test
What is the second element that must be proven for murder?
- A human being must be killed for murder
In law a feotus is not considered a human being, the child has to have an existence independant of the mother for it to be considered a human being.
Meaning the child must be born and seperated from the mother.
Element 2 : Human being continued
What may happen if the feotus is injured?
If the feotus is injured and the child is born alive but dies afterwards as a result of their injuries, this can be the actus reus for murder or manslaughter.
AG Reference 3 : Element of transferred malice
- D stabbed pregnant woman resulting in the death of the baby 128 days after birth due to complications, D charged with Manslaughter due to lack of mens rea.
(2) Human being continued
Outline legal death.
NHS v Bland had said that brain death is legal death
Doctors can turn of life support machine when there is brain death which suggests brain death is recognised test for death.
What is the 3rd element that must be proven for murder?
The killing must have been committed under the kings peace
What does the 3rd element of murder mean?
Being under the kings peace means that killing an enemy in the course of being at war is not murder.
However killing a prisoner of war is murder
What is the 4th element required for murder?
The killing must be unlawful, if the killing is lawful as seen in Re A 2000 Conjoined twins, then it isnt murder.
What are the 2 types of MR for murder?
- Expressed -if the intention is to kill
- Implied - if the intention is to cause GBH
Outline expressed intention.
Expressed intention is the intention to kill someone
Direct intention: Katie wants ryan to die so she stabs him multiple times.
- R v Mohan
Indirect intention: This is where death of another is not the aim, there was a virtual certainty it would occur.
-R v Woolin
Outline implied intention.
Implied intention is the intention to cause GBH, however the intention to cause GBH can be enough for the mens rea of murder.
R v Vickers (1957) - D striked victim multiple times in the head whilst burgling a home, court said the intention to cause GBH was enough for the MR of murder.
