Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
14 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
AR and case |
Unlawful killing of a human being under the queens peace GIBBONS V PROCTOR : failure to feed child was enough |
|
|
MR and case |
Malice aforethought - direct intent to kill -indirect intent to kill - direct/ indirect intent to cause GBH |
|
|
Chain of causation |
Malcherek and steel : stabbed wife repeatedly in stomach. In hospital she was ‘brain dead’ so machine was switched off. Does not break chain of causation to D |
|
|
For it to be murder must be one of 4 things |
Another ‘human being’ :only humans can be victimised of murder. 1. Foetus AG ref no.3 ; man stabbed pregnant gf who then gave birth prematurely. Baby and mother died. 2. Brain-dead (no single definition of death) brain stem death seems to be the accepted position of death. 3. Time limit (year and a day rule) no time limit on when death can occur. If more than 3 years the ‘attorney general consent is needed for prosecution |
|
|
Direct intent case |
Mohan : intention, consequence must be his main aim and purpose |
|
|
Oblique/ indirect intent + case woolin |
Prosecution must prove D foresaw death as a consequence of their actions Held: d must foresee death or serious injury as virtually certain |
|
|
Implied malice (intent to cause GBH) |
R v Vickers : during Ds burglary of Vs shop, D struck v with several blows V died from shock due to general injuries. Held: GBH was accepted as sufficient MR for murder |
|
|
Transferred malice |
Latimer - aimed a blow at a man who attacked him in a pub but it landed on a women defendant can be guilty for committing the same intended crime but not a different victim. |
|
|
Transferred malice issues pembliton |
Where the mens rea is for a completely different offence then D may not be guilty. D threw stone at window but intended to hit people he was fighting. Ratio - the intent was to hit people so could not be transferred to window |
|
|
Transferred malice issues pembliton |
Where the mens rea is for a completely different offence then D may not be guilty. D threw stone at window but intended to hit people he was fighting. Ratio - the intent was to hit people so could not be transferred to window |
|
|
Coincidence rule thabo meli |
In order for an offence to happen. Needs AR + MR at same time. Ds attacked a man and believed they killed him. Pushed him over a low cliff. Turns out man survived the attack but died of exposure when unconscious at cliff. (Combined in a series of acts) |
|
|
Coincidence rule church |
D had a fight with a woman and knocked her out. He then tried to bring her back around. Thought she was dead so put her in a river where she drowned. Conviction for manslaughter upheld |
|
|
Coincidence rule church |
D had a fight with a woman and knocked her out. He then tried to bring her back around. Thought she was dead so put her in a river where she drowned. Conviction for manslaughter upheld |
|
|
Continuing act |
Fagan metropolitan police commissioner: fagan drove on police officers foot without realising, after he noticed he refused to move. Convicted of assault as he knew the car was on PC’s foot and had required MR as the AR was still continuing |
