Murder A01

Question 1

Definition

Answer 1

‘the unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being under the queens peace with malice aforethought, expressed or implied’

Question 2

History of the definition

Answer 2

Common law offense, not defined by an act of parliament. Defined by judges in different cases and accepted definition is from Lord Coke, a 17th century judge

Question 3

Actus Reus of murder : Killing

Answer 3

Unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under queens peace
The defendant killed, Is a positive act but can be an omission in some cases where a duty of care is owed. (gibbons & proctor)
Is a result crime so cant be guilty unless the act or omission caused the death through factual causation (white) and legal causation, more than minimal cause (kimsey) and no break (jordan) thin skull rule (blaue)

Question 4

Actus Reus : Reasonable creature in being

Answer 4

Human must be killed. Foetus must have to have an existence independent of the mothers to be considered a creature in being (A-G Ref No.3 of 1994)
declaration of brain death by a medical professional is the recognized test for death so doctors are allowed to switch off life support machines with no liability (Malcherek) No time limit on when death may occur after unlawful act. After 3 years though the attorney general needs to give approval for prosecution to go ahead.

Question 5

Actus Reus ; Queens peace

Answer 5

killing of an enemy in the course of war is not murder. Killing of a prisoner of war is not allowed

Question 6

Actus Reus ; Killing was unlawful

Answer 6

if killing is in self defense or defense of another, or in a prevention of a crime and the D used reasonable force, then the killing is not unlawful (Re A (conjoined Twins). s76 CJand Immigrations Act 2008 allows for D who may have panicked when faced by an attack by another who cannot calculate the necessary force. However, if excessive, unreasonable force is used. Then the self defence will always fail (martin)

Question 7

Mens Rea for murder

Answer 7

Two types of intention to be proved
Expressed Malice aforethought = intention 100%
Implied Malice aforethought = cause serious harm leading to death (Vickers, Cunningham)
Intention divided into two
direct intent = 100% intention to kill or seriously injure ( Mohan)
Oblique intent = foresaw their actions were virtually certain to cause death or harm (Woolin)

Question 8

Mens Rea ; Malice

Answer 8

Transferred malice can be applied (gnango)
General Malice = D may have intention to hurt anyone no specific person in mind
Coinsidence of AR and MR = Both these must be present at the same time
However if the D forms the necessary mens res at some point during the course of the series of scts/events, they will be liable (le brun)