Murder cases Flashcards
Gibbins and proctor
Facts: A child’s father and his common law wife neglected and starved his child, who died of starvation
Ratio: establishes that an omission or a failure to act is capable of amounting to the actus reus of murder where the defendant has a duty of care towards the victim
Attorney general reference (no.3 of 1994) (1997)
Facts: d inflicted stab wounds on girlfriend who was between 22 and 24 weeks pregnant, the foetus was wounded and the girlfriend went into premature labour. The baby died 121 days after birth
Ratio: destroying a foetus whilst in the womb does not constitute murder. Foetus is not classified as a human being
R v Clegg
Facts: d shouted at driver but vehicle did not stop. D then fired 3 shots at v’s car which missed the target. D fired again the fourth time, killing one of the passengers in the vehicle
Ratio: where the force used is excessive the killing can amount to murder
R v vickers
Facts: v broke into local sweet shop. He came across v an old women who was deaf and attacked her. She died from her injuries
Ratio: An intention to cause gbh is sufficient as the mens rea for murder
Dpp v smith
Facts: Police officer leapt onto bonnet of car to prevent d from driving away with stolen goods. D drove at high speed dislodging the officer who was thrown into a path of an oncoming car and was killed
Ratio: objective rather than subjective test for intention
R v Moloney
Facts: D shot and killed step father in a drunken challenge
Ratio: d’s foresight of the natural consequences could not be equated to an intention to kill or cause grevious bodily harm
R v Nedrick
Facts: d poured paraffin(petrol bomb) through a letter box which caught fire and a child inside of the property was killed
Ratio:
R v Woollin
Facts: d threw 3 month old baby onto the ground. The baby suffered a fractured skull from which he then died
Ratio: test for intention is subjective. Court must look at d’s actual state of mind at the time of the actus reus
R v white
Facts: d placed poison in mothers drink intending that it would kill her. Before the poison could take effect the v died of an unrelated heart attack
Ratio: d’s conduct has been successfully overtaken by an unrelated cause of death, breaking the chain of causation
R v smith
Facts: d stabbed v piercing his lung. Medical professionals failed to notice injury and dropped him twice when moving him to medical station. They then failed to grasp seriousness of v’s injury and prescribed wrong treatment
Ratio: d will remain the legal cause where the original injury caused by the d remains an operating and significant cause
R v Cheshire
Facts: d shot v in stomach and thigh. V began to suffer from breathing difficulties and therefore the medical professions have a tracheotomy, v died from a complication
Ratio: when medical treatment constitutes a supervening act which breaks the chain of causation the treatment provided must be so independent of the d’s act and so potent in causing the death that the jury regard d’s act as insignificant
R v Blaue
Facts: v refused to have sex with d, as a result d stabbed her. She refused blood transfusion and subsequently died
Ratio: v’s actions did not constitute a novus actus interveniens therefore d was guilty of the offence
