Murder Flashcards
Is there a statutory definition of murder?
No
= common law offence
What helps define murder?
Sir Edward Coke - Institute of the Law of England 1797
‘Unlawful killing of another human being, under the Queen’s (King’s) peace with the intention to kill/ cause serious harm’
Can a killing be lawful?
Yes
Certain defences if pleaded successfully (self-defence)
If in time of war
How can the AR of killing be performed?
Can be by act/ commission
BUT MUST cause death of V
How can the AR of murder be done by an omission?
Give a case to illustrate this
Where D failed to act under their legal duty
e.g R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918)
R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918)
Failed to fulfil their duty as parents
Gibbins daughter died
What type of crime is murder?
What does this mean?
Result crime
There may be a chain of causation
Factual + legal must be proven
What 2 issues are raised by the fact that the killing must be of a human being?
- What stage does foetus become a human
2. What stage during death does human become corpse?
When is a baby/ foetus classed as a human being?
What cases illustrates this?
Has to have ‘independent existence than that of mother for it to be considered a creature of being’
R v Poulton (1832)
AG reference (No 3 of 1994)(1997)
R v Poulton (1832)
Mother tied string around neck of baby
Killed it while being born
Ct: for baby to be considered a person, must be fully expelled from body
Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994)(1997)
D stabbed G.friend, 23 weeks pregnant
She recovered, baby born early (7 months)
Died 4 months later - birth complications
D pleaded G, wounding G.friend with intent
Charged for murder of baby
Acquitted by trial judge
Prosecution appealed
CA: murder = possible; foetus = part mother
Intention towards mother, equivalent to intent directed at foetus
HL: ‘would overstrain doctrine of transferred malice’, at most manslaughter = possible
Why was the ‘within a year and a day’ rule abolished?
Abolished by Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996
Advances in medical knowledge
Life support machines
Now no time limit
But if after 3 years, AG’s consent = needed to prosecute
What act abolished the ‘year and a day rule’?
Law Reform (Year and a Day) Act 1996
Can D be prosecuted if death occurs more than 3 years after the unlawful act?
Yes
Attorney General’s consent is needed to prosecute
What is the MR of murder often know as?
Malice aforethought
What is the MR for murder?
Intention to kill/ cause GBH
Includes situations of assisted suicides
What are the 2 types of intention?
- Direct
2. Indirect (Oblique)
What is direct intent?
Accused wants the result to occur + sets out to achieve it
What is indirect intent?
(Oblique)
Accused didn’t desire a particular result but but acting the way that they did, they realised that it might occur
What is a problem with indirect intent?
Has proved difficult to define
Number of cases have sought to define it
R v Hyam (1972)
Fire
D wanted to scare V
Both in love with same man
D put fire through letterbox
Caused 2 children to die
HL: D foresaw consequences of her actions as highly probably, that meant intention
Even if didn’t want to kill children, knew that it could’ve been highly likely to happen
What case overruled the principles set in Hyam?
R v Moloney (1985)
Hyam was declared to be bad law
Just; someone foresaw risk didn’t automatically mean that they intended it
R v Moloney (1985)
gun contest
D = drinking heavily with father
Had disagreement about who could load + fire gun quickest
D loads 1st, claimed not to have aimed
Shot + killed father
Lord Bridge formulated 2 part test:
Was death/ serious injury natural consequence of D’s act?
Did D foresee that?
What is the 2 part test that Lord Bridge cam up with in the case of Moloney (1985)?
- Was death/ serious injury the natural consequence of the D’s act?
- Did the D foresee that?
If ‘yes’ to both, jury can infer intention
What case was the virtual certainty test created in?
R v Nedrick (1986)
What did the CA do in the case of R v Nedrick (1986)?
Crystallised rulings of Moloney + Hancock
Created virtual certainty test
What are the 2 parts to the virtual certainty test?
- How probable was the consequence which resulted form D’s voluntary act?
- Did D foresee the consequences as virtually certain?
Only if jury = satisfied D recognised GBH/ death = virtually certain from voluntary act can intention be inferred
DOESN’T MEAN they intended the result
R v Woollin (1999)
baby chocked
3 month baby chocked on food D lost temper Shook + threw baby across room Baby hit head D: 'didn't mean to kill/ cause GBH' BUT harm = virtually certain Conviction substituted by HL for MS; trial judge referred to 'substantial risk' rather than 'virtually certain'
What is transferred malice?
Transferred MR
D intent to kill/ seriously harm V but accidentally harms/ kills another
Can be G of crime against V no. 2
What case illustrates the doctrine of transferred malice?
Latimer (1886)
Latimer (1886)
belt
D having argument in pub
Took off belt + swung it
Missed intended V, but wounded a woman
Even though = accident, still convicted of malicious wounding
what must be established in murder?
Factual + legal causation
