Resit must knows from others Flashcards
(M/C) In relation to Infanticide, who decides on the mothers state of mind?
The Jury
(M/C) A written notice of alibi must include:
The name and address of the witness
(M/C) For a child aged between 10-13 charged with murder or manslaughter what court is their trail held in?
- First appearance in the Youth Court
- Case automatically transfers to the High Court for trial and sentencing.
(S/A) R v Horry
Death should be provable by circumstances that render it morally certain and leave no ground for reasonable doubt that the circumstantial evidence be so cogent and compelling as to convince a jury that upon no rational hypothesis other than murder can the facts be accounted for.
(S/A) Legal duties as referred to in Section 160(2)(b) for Culpable Homicide are defined as:
Cases where nothing is done when there is a legal duty to act, and cases of positive conduct accompanied by a failure to carry out a legal duty, in particular a duty of care.
If death results from either omission, the defendant may be convicted of manslaughter if there is sufficient fault or murder if the defendant had the intent.
(S/A) R v Blaue
Those who use violence must take their victims as they find them.
The victim was stabbed and refused a blood transfusion because it was against her religious belief.
Despite a warning that she would die, she continued to refuse and died on the following day.
The cause of death was bleeding caused by the stabbing.
An appeal against a conviction of manslaughter, on the grounds that her refusal to have a blood transfusion broke the chain of causation between the stabbing and her death was dismissed
(S/A) The general rule has been that intoxication may be a defence to the commission of an offence where?
- The intoxication causes a disease of the mind, bringing insanity into effect
- If intent is required as an essential element of the offence and the drunkenness is such that the defence can plead a lack of intent to commit the offence
- Where the intoxication causes a state of automatism.
(S/A) Application in New Zealand Courts in relation to Automatism involving drugs and alcohol
New Zealands principle is that self-induced intoxication can lead to a defence of automatism if the evidence supports the defence.
In New Zealand, the courts are likely to allow a defence of automatism caused from taking alcohol and drugs, to offences of basic intent only.
The courts are likely to disallow a defence where the state of mind is self-induced, the person is blameworthy, and the consequences were expected.
(S/A) Definition of Wilfully Frightening
Wilfully frightening is regarded as intending to frighten, or at least be reckless as to this.
(S/A) What was held in R v Ranger in relation to pre-emptive strike?
A woman stabbed her partner in the shoulder causing him to die after he said he would kill her and her son whilst reaching under the bed where he kept his guns. He didn’t have a gun in his possession but they were stored under the bed.
The Court found that if the defendant thought that her and her sons lives were in danger and that the enraged deceased might attempt to shoot them with a rifle nearby, then it would be going to far to think that a jury could not entertain a reasonable doubt as to whether a pre-emptive strike with a knife would be reasonable force in the circumstances.
(S/A) When charging an offender with murder under s167, to prove intent you must show that the defendant:
- Intended to cause death, or
- Knew that death was likely to ensue, or
- Was reckless that death would ensue.
(S/A) What is the view of the New Zealand Courts in relation to a defence of entrapment?
NZ courts reject entrapment as a defence, preferring to rely on the distraction of the trial judge to exclude evidence that would operate unfairly against the defendant. Exclusion may be considered where law enforcement agents generate the offending.
