homicide caselaw Flashcards
R v Myatt
Before a breach of any act, bylaw or regulation becomes an unlawful act as per s160- culpable homicide, it must likely cause harm to the deceased or similar person
Murray Wright Ltd [1970] NZLR 476.
Because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation (such as a
hospital or food company) cannot be convicted as a principal offender.
R v Tomars
- was the deceased threatened, fear of or deceieved by defendant?
- was that fear, threat or deception the reason for the dceased actions which caused death?
- would a reasonable person in the defendants shoes have seen death as a consequence
- did those forseeable actions contribute to death?
R V HORRY (Body not located)
the circumstantial evidence should be so cogent and compelling that no doubt is left in the jurys mind that death occured when the body is not located.
Cameron V R (recklessness)
the defendant recognised that their actions would bring about a perscribed result and that their actions were unreasonable in the circumstances
R V piri (recklessness)
recklessness involves a conscious and deliberate risk taking.
the degree of death forseen by the accused under 167(b) or (d) must be more than negligible or remote.
the accused must recognise a real or substantial risk that death would be caused.
R V Desmond (pursuit of an unlawful object)
object be unlawful
must know that his act is likely to cause death.
must show that his knowledge accompanied the act causing death.
R V MURPHY (attempts)
when proving an attempt to commit an offence it must be shown that the accused’s intention was to commit that offence.
Eg: in a case of attempted murder it is necessary for the crown to establish an actual intent to kill
R V HARPUR
the defendants conduct may be viewed cumulatively and in its entirity.
Considering what remains to be done is relevant but not determative.
T V MANE (accessory after the fact)
to be an accessory after the fact, the murder must be completed @ time of criminal involvement.
Cant be an AATF to murder if act was completed before the murder
R V BLAUE (preventable death)
those who do violence must take their victims as they find them
R V FORREST AND FORREST
the best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of the victims age.
R v COTTLE
as to degree of proof, it is sufficent if the plea is established to the satisfaction of the jury on a preponderance of possibilities without necessarily excluding all reasonable doubt.
R v CLARK
the decision as to an accused insanity is always for the jury and the verdict inconsistant with medical evidence is not nessessarily unreasonable.
but where unchallenged medical evidence is supported by the surrounding facts a jurys verdict must be founded on that evidence which in this case shows that the accused did not and had been unable to know that his act was morally wrong.
R V CODERE (nature and quality of act)
the nature and quality of the act
means the physical character of the act.
the phrase does not involve any consideration of the accused
moral perception nor his knowledge of the moral quality of the act.
Thus a person who is so deluded that he cuts a womans throat
beleiving that he was cutting a load of bread
would not know the nature or quality of his act.
