Assignment 2- Problem Question
After a strange course of events, Raven’s actions have consequently caused the death of Hiro and of Y.T’s child. Through an in-depth analysis of the case I will effectively advise the prosecution of the appropriate charges against Raven. I will also discuss the prospects of the conviction as well as the maximum penalty for those charges.
I will begin by looking at the aggravating factors in the case, advising the prosecution what charges will be placed upon Raven. Raven is the ex of Y.T and the father of her child. This information illustrates the fuel behind Ravens anger towards Hiro. The case begins by illustrating Raven’s pre-meditated act of revenge on Hiro. Raven begins by unlawfully entering Y.T and Hiro’s …show more content…
Hiro is rushed to hospital where he undergoes emergency surgery in an attempt to fix the huge depressed fracture of his skull. During the course of the surgery Hiro suffers a massive brain haemorige and dies. In this particular instance the accused’s attorney may try to incorporate Eggshell skull. The defendant’s attorney may try to argue that this brain haemorrhage may be the result of a hidden defect in the victim, prior to altercation between Raven and Hiro. It is in this instance the prosecution can use the case of R v Martyr (1962), where the victim died from a cerebral haemorrhage after several blows to the jaw. Medical evidence suggested that a normal person would not have suffered serious injuries as the victim had weakened blood vessels. The case held that the accused was still criminally responsible for the death of the victim. The accused’s attorney may try to use eggshell skull as reasoning for …show more content…
In the WA Court of Appeal a retrospective test has been adopted in order to establish causation. This test is called the “Operating or Substantial Cause Test”. I advise the prosecution to ask him/herself, was the accused’s act an operating or substantial cause of the damage. I advise the prosecution to argue that the substantial cause of death would be the push. Despite Hiro’s intoxication, the prosecution should argue that a normal person would still have suffered the same injuries. Once the prosecution has established that the outcome is a substantial consequence of the push then Raven can be said to have caused the death of
After a strange course of events, Raven’s actions have consequently caused the death of Hiro and of Y.T’s child. Through an in-depth analysis of the case I will effectively advise the prosecution of the appropriate charges against Raven. I will also discuss the prospects of the conviction as well as the maximum penalty for those charges.
I will begin by looking at the aggravating factors in the case, advising the prosecution what charges will be placed upon Raven. Raven is the ex of Y.T and the father of her child. This information illustrates the fuel behind Ravens anger towards Hiro. The case begins by illustrating Raven’s pre-meditated act of revenge on Hiro. Raven begins by unlawfully entering Y.T and Hiro’s …show more content…
Hiro is rushed to hospital where he undergoes emergency surgery in an attempt to fix the huge depressed fracture of his skull. During the course of the surgery Hiro suffers a massive brain haemorige and dies. In this particular instance the accused’s attorney may try to incorporate Eggshell skull. The defendant’s attorney may try to argue that this brain haemorrhage may be the result of a hidden defect in the victim, prior to altercation between Raven and Hiro. It is in this instance the prosecution can use the case of R v Martyr (1962), where the victim died from a cerebral haemorrhage after several blows to the jaw. Medical evidence suggested that a normal person would not have suffered serious injuries as the victim had weakened blood vessels. The case held that the accused was still criminally responsible for the death of the victim. The accused’s attorney may try to use eggshell skull as reasoning for …show more content…
In the WA Court of Appeal a retrospective test has been adopted in order to establish causation. This test is called the “Operating or Substantial Cause Test”. I advise the prosecution to ask him/herself, was the accused’s act an operating or substantial cause of the damage. I advise the prosecution to argue that the substantial cause of death would be the push. Despite Hiro’s intoxication, the prosecution should argue that a normal person would still have suffered the same injuries. Once the prosecution has established that the outcome is a substantial consequence of the push then Raven can be said to have caused the death of