Topic 2 Murder And Attempts Flashcards
Attempts, incitement and conspiracy are often reffered to as ‘inchoate crimes’ because they are;
All Uncompleted
The actus reus for a crime of attempt pursuant to s 321N(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) includes conduct that is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence and
Imediately and not remotely connected with the commission of the offence
The case of R v Eagleton (1855) Dears CC 515; 169 ER 826 considered the concept of how proximate conduct had to be to satisfy an attempt, and found that if the accused
had done the last act within his or her power needed for the completion of the offence, this would be an attempt
The accused faked his own death and was discovered before his wife put in a life insurance claim in the Director of Public Prosecutions v Stonehouse [1978] AC 55. There was an issue as to whether;
The accused went a substantial way towards the attainment of his goal or whether it was merely preparation for the wife to possibly lodge a claim
The case of R v Page [1933] VLR 351 looked at the question of whether the accused’s conduct in arming himself with a lever to break into a shop, which was put under the window ledge, but not yet opened;
Was one of a series of acts or omissions which would have constituted an offence if they had not been interrupter by the pssing policeman
A scenario that is not likely to be proven as an attempt is;
the accused mistakenly thinking chewing gum in the street is a crime in Australia and unwraps the gum to pop it in his mouth
Crime of preparation include;
possession of instruments commonly used for forging or counterfeiting, being in possession of implements of house breaking, safebreaking or car theft and acts preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act
The criminalization of attemps under common law developed to
Stamp out the prevelant practice of duelling
R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 established a stricter test for mens rea for attempts as compared to completed offences
Under s 321N(3) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)
the defence of factual impossibility has been abolished
Homicide can be categorised into
Excusable homicide, justifiable homicide and felonious homicides (inclusive of murder and manslaughter)
To commit murder, death would have to ensue within a year and a day of the accused’s voluntary action. Is this proposition current law?
No - this rule has been abolished in Victoria as it is unjust for a person who intentionally communicates a serious disease like AIDS or negligently creates a situation like asbestos poisoning, to escape criminal liability just because the victim dies many years later
When there are jurisctional issues as to where the murder took place;
it is where the physical act of the accused is performed, which determines the locus of the homicide
In Royal v R (1991) the court considered whether a voluntary act on the part of the victim could break the chain of causation between the accuseds conduct and her ultimate death. In this case, the principle at issues was whether;
The accuseds conduct creates in the mind of the victim a well founded and reasonable apprehension that the victims life was in danger leading to the natural consequence that the victim would seek to escape. If so actions in the interest of self- preservation should sever the chain of causation. This was the case of suicide,, not homicide and the mental element of the accused is conflated with the physical element of causation? Does the accused need to reasonably forsee that the victim would seek to escape in this manner?
The concept of transferred malice;
is settled law if D shoots at V, and hits and kills W instead, D is guilty of the murder of W (and of the attempted murder of V)
