Short Answers - 1 Flashcards

1
Q

What is Culpable Homicide?

A

It is the blameworthy killing of a person by another. The three main types of culpable homicide is murder, manslaughter and infanticide.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Outline “M’Naghten’s Rules”

A

The M’Naghten’s rules (or test) is frequently used to establish whether or not a defendant is insane. It is based on the person’s ability to think rationally, so that if a person is insane they were acting under such a defect of reason from a disease of the mind that they did not know:
- The nature and quality of their actions, or
- That what they were doing was wrong

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

List four statutory legal duties in respect of the Crimes Act 1961:

A

(1) Provide the necessaries and protect from injury (S151)
(2) Provide necessaries and protect from injury to your charges when you are a parent or guardian (S152)
(3) Provide necessaries as an employer (S153)
(4) Use reasonable knowledge and skill when performing dangerous acts, such as surgery (S155)
(5) Take precautions when in charge of dangerous things, such as machinery (S156)
(6) Avoid omissions that will endanger life (S157)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

List the difference between counselling or attempting to procure murder (S174) and conspiracy to murder (S175)?

A

Jurisdiction: Counselling or attempting to procure murder requires that the murder be committed within New Zealand., whereas with conspiracy to murder, the murder can take place in New Zealand or elsewhere.

Outcome: Counselling or attempting to procure murder applies only if the murder is not actually committed, whereas conspiracy to murder applies whether or not the murder is ultimately carried out.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

S159 (1) & (2) CA 1961 defines when a child becomes a human being and is therefor able to be murdered under S158. Detail the provisions of S159(1) & (2):

A

S159(1):
A child is considered a human being under this law as soon as it is fully born and leaves its mother’s body, regardless of whether it has started breathing, has its own blood circulation, or whether the umbilical cord is cut.

S159(2):
If a child dies because of injuries before, during, or after birth, it is considered homicide.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Define ‘Homicide S158, CA 1961:

A

Homicide is the killing of another human being, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsover.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What was held in ‘R v Mane’:

A

A person can only be an accessory to a crime if the crime is already completed when they get involved. You can’t be convicted as an accessory to murder if the murder was fully carried out before you became involved.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

State the ingredients of Infanticide S178, CA 1961:

A

If a woman causes the death of her child under 10 years old, but at the time her mind was disturbed due to effects of childbirth, lactation or related conditions, she may be charged with infanticide instead of murder or manslaughter. If found guilty, she could be sentenced to up to 3 years in prison.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What does ‘R v Myatt’ state about an unlawful act in respect of S160(2) CA 1961:

A

Before an act can be considered unlawful for causing culpable homicide, it must be an action that could likely harm the deceased, or a group of people that person belonged to.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was held in ‘R v Tomars’:

A

Formulates the issues in the following way:
(1) Did the accused threaten, scare, or deceive the deceased?
(2) If so, did this cause the deceased to take the action that led to their death?
(3) Was the deceased’s action a natural result of what the accused did, meaning that a reasonable person in the accused’s position could have expected it?
(4) Did the victim’s actions, which were foreseeable, play a significant role in their death?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

In general, no one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence of the mind. What are the exceptions to this rule?

A
  • Wilfully frightening a child under 16 years of age
  • Wilfully frightening a sick person (mentally or physically)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is meant by the term “justified?” Provide two examples:

A

Some acts that result in death may be “justified,” meaning the person who committed the act is not legally liable, either criminally or civilly.
Examples include:
Self defence - Section 48: where homicide occurs to protection oneself
Preventing suicide or stopping a serious crime - Section 41: where homicide happens to prevent immediate harm to someone or their property.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Why is attempted murder one of the most difficult offences in the CA 1961 to prove beyond reasonable doubt?

A

R v Murphy: To prove an attempt to commit a crime, it must be shown that the accused intended to commit the full offence. For example, in an attempted murder case, the prosecution must prove that the accused actually intended to kill.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the ingredients to accessory after the fact to murder?

A

Knowing any person to have been party to a murder, receives, comforts, assists that person or tampers with or actively suppresses evidence against that person in order to enable him to escape after arrest or to avoid conviction.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define the term “Suicide Pact”, S180(3), CA 1961:

A

A suicide pact is when two or more people agree that all of them will die, whether each person takes their own life or not. However, a person’s actions will only be considered part of the pact if they intend to die as part of it at the time they act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

R v Forrest & Forrest:

A

The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of the Victims age.

17
Q

How do New Zealand Courts deal with a defence of ‘Automatism’ arising out of taking alcohol and/or drugs?

A

In New Zealand, the courts are likely to steer a middle course, allowing a defence of automatism arising out of taking alcohol and drugs, to offences of basic intent only. They are likely to disallow the defence where the state of mind is obviously self-induced, the person is blameworthy, and the consequences could have been expected.

18
Q

List the ingredients for S48, CA 1961 (Self-defence or defence of another):

A

Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

19
Q

What was held in ‘R v Ranger’:

A

If the accused truly believed that she and her son were in danger because the deceased might try to shoot them after a struggle, it might be unreasonable to say that the jury couldn’t have any doubts about whether using a knife first (before being attacked) was reasonable in that situation.

20
Q

Provide three guidelines in respect of consent regarding assault:

A

(1) Everyone has a right to consent to a surgical operation.
(2) Everyone has a right to consent to the infliction of force not involving bodily harm.
(3) No one has a right to consent to their death or injury likely to cause death.

21
Q

What is the four point test for proving an unlawful act for manslaugther?

A

(1) The defendant must intentionally do an act
(2) The act must be unlawful
(3) The act must be dangerous
(4) The act must cause death