Murder Flashcards
What is the definition of murder according to common law?
‘The unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen’s peace, with malice aforethought express or implied.’
What is the actus reus of murder?
The unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen’s peace.
Define unlawful
Without lawful excuse - ie. Not in self defence
What was held in R v Malcharek and R v Steel [1981] regarding unlawful killing?
Doctors turning off life support when V was already dead was not an unlawful killing.
What can result in the actus reus of murder?
The killing can result from a positive act or an omission.
What does ‘human being’ refer to in the context of murder?
The idea that life begins at birth; a baby must be born alive and outside the mother, wholly independent and expelled from the womb.
What is the significance of ‘Queen’s peace’ in murder law?
Killing an enemy in battle during a war is not murder.
What is required for causation in murder?
D must be the factual and legal cause of V’s death and chain of causation must remain intact.
What is the test for factual causation?
Whether we can say that V would not have died ‘but for D’s act or omission.’
What is the test for legal causation?
D’s act must be the operative and substantial cause of death
Refer to R v Smith for substantial cause and Cheshire for significant contribution.
What legal issues must be considered in legal causation?
Thin skull rule, V’s own actions, medical negligence (intervening acts)
These factors can affect the attribution of legal causation.
What is ‘express malice’ in the context of Mens Rea?
D must intend to kill V
This indicates a clear intent to cause death.
What does ‘implied malice’ refer to?
D intends to cause V really serious harm (GBH) and V dies
This reflects a lesser degree of direct intent but still results in a fatal outcome.
Define direct intent.
Where the jury can be satisfied that D had the desire or aim to bring about the prohibited consequence
Refer to R v Mohan [1976] for legal precedent.
What is oblique intent?
Where the jury can be satisfied that D intended an outcome as it was a virtually certain consequence of D’s conduct, and D realised this
Refer to R v Woollin [1999] for legal context.
TEMPLATE - Summary for Murder
1 - AR - unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under the kings peace - APPLY
2 - CAUSATION - factual, legal, intervening acts
3 - MR - Malice aforethought, expressed or implied - APPLY
4 - If found guilty, faces mandatory life sentence
Murder - Full A01 Template
The actual reus of murder, defined by Lord Coke is the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under the kings peace. As murder is a result crime, it will be necessary for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that D has caused the death of V.
D is the factual cause, as ‘But For’ his actions, she would not have died (Pagett). He is also the legal cause as he made a ‘significant contribution’ (Cheshire) or was the operative and substantial cause (Smith). The chain of causation must remain intact. Finally, D is clearly a reasonable creature in being, the murder did not occur at war, and D had no lawful excuse for killing eg. Self-defence. Because of the above, the actual reus is satisfied.
The men’s Rea for murder is malice aforethought, expressed (intention to kill) or implied (intention to cause gbh (Vickers). Murder is a specific intent crime, its intention define s a ‘decision to bring about a prohibited consequence’ (Mohan) or aim, purpose, objective.
IF D ARGUES HE DIDNT MEAN TO/NO INTENTION - the jury would need to consider oblique intention. The test for oblique intention is whether death or GBH was a virtually certain consequence of Ds actions, and if D appreciated this (Woolin). If yes, the jury can infer specific intent.
If found guilty, D would face a mandatory life sentence.
