Question 1 Under section 249.1 of the Criminal Code, it is stated that “every one commits an offence who, operating a motor vehicle while being pursued by a peace officer operating a motor vehicle, fails, without reasonable excuse and in order to evade the peace officer, to stop the vehicle as soon as is reasonable in the circumstances”. In the case presented, Krook deliberately failed in stopping the vehicle under reasonable circumstances, thus, leading to the death of Pip. To convict Krook under s. 249.1, the Crown must, as set in Nette (2001), prove the factual causation and also legal causation. To do such, it is crucial to view the cases of Shilon (2006) and Trakas (2008), where Trakas had chased (by the means of his SUV) Shilon, who
…show more content…
The Jordan case saw the accused stab Beaumont (the victim) in a café, and Beaumont had been brought to receive improper medical treatment. Additionally, the actions of the physicians were seen as wrong by doctors, and the improper procedures caused the death of Beaumont. What remains vital to the case is the fact that Beaumont had recovered from the stab wound at the time of death, hence, the improper treatment had broken the chain of causation between the original wounding and Beaumont’s death. Likewise, while there is no doubt that Dr. Death’s improper treatment was a causation of Compeyson’s death, the question remains if the chain of causation between the original gunshot wound and Compeyson’s death had been broken. A key fact is presented in how Compeyson appears to be making excellent progress to being with, but after a week (substantial time from original wounding), he begins to develop some internal bleeding. Moreover, the question now stands to be if Compeyson had been fully healed before the internal bleeding had begun. If so, then chain of causation between the original gunshot wound and Compeyson’s death had been broken, therefore, Magwitch would not be criminally responsible for Compeyson’s death. However, if not, then the causation still exists, and thus, Magwitch would be criminally responsible for …show more content…
The brothers were found guilty as the factual causation was present as “but for” their actions, the victim would not have died. Similarly, the legal causation was proved as it was reasonably foreseeable for the brothers to realize that the bouncer would react in the manner that the bouncer did. In addition, in Duncan’s case, “but for” his attack on Macbeth, Macbeth would still be alive; hence, the factual causation is proved. As for the legal causation, the attacked occurred in a wheat field in the Canadian prairies, likely being harvested by a harvester, thus, it was reasonable foreseeable for Duncan to realize the consequence of leaving Macbeth unconscious in a wheat field, therefore, Duncan is criminally responsible for Macbeth’s
The Jordan case saw the accused stab Beaumont (the victim) in a café, and Beaumont had been brought to receive improper medical treatment. Additionally, the actions of the physicians were seen as wrong by doctors, and the improper procedures caused the death of Beaumont. What remains vital to the case is the fact that Beaumont had recovered from the stab wound at the time of death, hence, the improper treatment had broken the chain of causation between the original wounding and Beaumont’s death. Likewise, while there is no doubt that Dr. Death’s improper treatment was a causation of Compeyson’s death, the question remains if the chain of causation between the original gunshot wound and Compeyson’s death had been broken. A key fact is presented in how Compeyson appears to be making excellent progress to being with, but after a week (substantial time from original wounding), he begins to develop some internal bleeding. Moreover, the question now stands to be if Compeyson had been fully healed before the internal bleeding had begun. If so, then chain of causation between the original gunshot wound and Compeyson’s death had been broken, therefore, Magwitch would not be criminally responsible for Compeyson’s death. However, if not, then the causation still exists, and thus, Magwitch would be criminally responsible for …show more content…
The brothers were found guilty as the factual causation was present as “but for” their actions, the victim would not have died. Similarly, the legal causation was proved as it was reasonably foreseeable for the brothers to realize that the bouncer would react in the manner that the bouncer did. In addition, in Duncan’s case, “but for” his attack on Macbeth, Macbeth would still be alive; hence, the factual causation is proved. As for the legal causation, the attacked occurred in a wheat field in the Canadian prairies, likely being harvested by a harvester, thus, it was reasonable foreseeable for Duncan to realize the consequence of leaving Macbeth unconscious in a wheat field, therefore, Duncan is criminally responsible for Macbeth’s