Homicide Law and Defences

Question 1

Murray Wright Ltd

Answer 1

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

Question 2

R v Myatt

Answer 2

[Before a breach of any Act, regulation or bylaw would be an unlawful act under s 160 for the purposes of culpable homicide] it must be an act likely to do harm to the deceased or to some class of persons of whom he was one.

Question 3

R v Tomars

Answer 3

1. Was the deceased threatened by, in fear of or deceived by the defendant?
2. If they were, did such threats, fear or deception cause the deceased to do the act that caused their death?
3. Was the act a natural consequence of the actions of the defendant, in the sense that reasonable and responsible people in the defendant’s position at the time could reasonably have foreseen the consequences?
4. Did these foreseeable actions of the victim contribute in a [significant] way to his death?

Question 4

R v Horry

Answer 4

Death should be provable by such circumstances as render it morally certain and leave no ground for reasonable doubt – that the circumstantial evidence should be so cogent and compelling as to convince a jury that upon no rational hypothesis other than murder can the facts be accounted for.

Question 5

`R v Harney

Answer 5

“Recklessness means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In New Zealand it involves proof that the consequence complained of could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of risk.”

In R v Harney the defendant was convicted of murder after stabbing the victim in the stomach during an altercation. He argued unsuccessfully that he had been aiming for the victim’s leg knowing he could have seriously injured the man, but denied wanting to kill him.

Question 6

R v Piri

Answer 6

Recklessness [here] involves a conscious, deliberate risk taking. The degree of risk of death foreseen by the accused under either s167(b) or (d) must be more than negligible or remote. The accused must recognise a “real or substantial risk” that death would be caused:

Question 7

R v Desmond

Answer 7

Not only must the object be unlawful, but also the accused must know that his act is likely to cause death. It must be shown that his knowledge accompanied the act causing death.

Killing in pursuit of an unlawful object: s167(d)
The classic example of a case coming under this provision is one in which death was caused by blowing up a prison wall to liberate prisoners.

Question 8

R v Murphy

Answer 8

When proving an attempt to commit an offence it must be shown that the accused’s intention was to commit the substantive offence. For example, in a case of attempted murder it is necessary for the Crown to establish an actual intent to kill:

Question 9

R v Harpur

Answer 9

[The Court may] have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops … the defendant’s conduct [may] be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done … is always relevant, though not determinative.

In the matter of R v Harpur, the defendant had carried out a number of acts which, taken together, constituted an attempt to commit sexual violation. The defendant had moved beyond the point of preparation and was lying in wait for his victim at which time he was arrested. The Court determined that the defendant’s conduct was not too remote to constitute an attempt; it was proximately connected with the intended offence:

Question 10

R v Mane

Answer 10

For a person to be an accessory the offence must be complete at the time of the criminal involvement. One cannot be convicted of being an accessory after the fact of murder when the actus reus of the alleged criminal conduct was wholly completed before the offence of homicide was completed.

Question 11

R v Blaue

Answer 11

Those who use violence must take their victims as they find them.

The victim [a Jehovah’s witness] had been stabbed but refused to accept a blood transfusion. An appeal against a conviction of manslaughter, on the ground that her refusal to have a blood transfusion was unreasonable and broke the chain of causation between the stabbing and her death, was dismissed.

Question 12

Culpable homicide

Section + defenition

Answer 12

160 Culpable homicide

(1) Homicide may be either culpable or not culpable.
(2) Homicide is culpable when it consists in the killing of any person—
(a) By an unlawful act; or
(b) By an omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty; or
(c) By both combined; or
(d) By causing that person by threats or fear of violence, or by deception, to do an act which causes his death; or
(e) By wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person.
(3) Except as provided in section 178 of this Act, culpable homicide is either murder or manslaughter.
(4) Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence.

Question 13

Distinction between murder and manslaughter

Answer 13

whether the offender intended to kill the deceased or to harm them in a way they knew might result in death.

Question 14

To establish death, you must prove?

Answer 14

− death occurred
− deceased is identified as the person who has been killed
− the killing is culpable

Question 15

Time limit for death to be seen as caused by another

Answer 15

The death needs to occur within a year and a day from the time the last unlawful act or omission occurred.

Question 16

Can an organisation (as opposed to a human being) be convicted of murder or manslaughter?

Answer 16

No. Because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation cannot be convicted as the principal offender. Moreover, although an organisation can be convicted as a party to manslaughter, with murder an organisation cannot be convicted as either the principal offender or a party to the offence because it is not possible for an organisation to serve the offence’s mandatory life sentence.

Question 17

What is the legal view of consent to death?

Answer 17

The law does not recognise the right of a person to consent to their being killed (s63 of the Crimes Act 1961). As a consequence, their consent does not affect the criminal responsibility of anyone else involved in the killing.

Question 18

Is a body required to prove the death of a person? Explain your answer with reference to case law R v Horry.

Answer 18

No a body is not required to prove death of a person has occurred. Death should be provable by such circumstances as render it morally certain and leave no ground for reasonable doubt – that the circumstantial evidence should be so cogent and compelling as to convince a jury that upon no rational hypothesis other than murder can the facts be accounted for. R v Horry

Question 19

Would you be charged with any offence if you fatally injured another player during a rugby match? If so, what might the charges be?

Answer 19

Normally you would not be charged with the killing of another player if they died from injuries you caused while playing football. However, you would be guilty of manslaughter if your actions were considered likely to cause serious injury, as you should have been aware of this at the time and refrained from the action.

Question 20

R v Forrest and Forrest

Answer 20

“The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of [the victim’s] age.”

In R v Forrest & Forrest two men were charged with having sexual intercourse with a 14-year-old girl who had run away from Child Welfare custody. At trial the girl produced her birth certificate and gave evidence herself that she was the person named in the certificate. The men successfully appealed their convictions on the grounds that the Crown had not adequately proved the girl’s age.

Question 21

R v Cottle

Burden of proof - insanity

Answer 21

As to degree of proof, it is sufficient if the plea is established to the satisfaction of the jury on a preponderance of probabilities without necessarily excluding all reasonable doubt
R v Cottle

Thus, the defendant is not required to prove the defence of insanity beyond reasonable doubt, but to the satisfaction of the jury on the balance of probabilities.

Question 22

R v Clark

Answer 22

The decision as to an accused’s insanity is always for the jury and a verdict inconsistent with medical evidence is not necessarily unreasonable. But where unchallenged medical evidence is supported by the surrounding facts a jury’s 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.

Question 23

R v Codere

Answer 23

Insane if dont know nature and quality of the act

R v Codere provides a succinct definition of what constitutes the nature and quality of an 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’s moral perception nor his knowledge of the moral quality of the act. Thus a person who is so deluded that he cuts a woman’s throat believing that he is cutting a loaf of bread would not know the nature and quality of his act.

Question 24

R v Cottle

Automatism

Answer 24

Doing something without knowledge of it and without memory afterwards of having done it - a temporary eclipse of consciousness that nevertheless leaves the person so affected able to exercise bodily movements.

Question 25

R v Joyce

Answer 25

R v Joyce The Court of Appeal decided that the compulsion must be made by a person who is present when the offence is committed. Pihema was inside the service station with the firearm while Joyce was outside, Joyce was therefore not threatened with “immediate” death or grievous bodily harm from a person “who was present” when Joyce did the acts which made him a party to the offence.

Question 26

Police v Lavelle

Answer 26

It is permissible for undercover officers to merely provide the opportunity for someone who is ready and willing to offend, as long as the officers did not initiate the person’s interest or willingness to so offend. Entrapment Lavelle approached a male undercover police officer y use a prostitute (female undercover officer) As the three of them left the hotel to go to his premises, Lavelle was arrested. Although this offence would not have been committed without the aid of the undercover officers, they had merely given Lavelle the opportunity to commit the kind of offence which he had shown a willingness to commit. They had not been the instigators of interest in living off the earnings of prostitutes.

Question 27

Penalty for attempted murder

Answer 27

14 years

Question 28

Define R v Tarei

Answer 28

Withdrawal of any form of life support is not "treatment" under S166 CA 61. Withdrawal does not cause death but removes possibility of extending death

Question 29

Concealing dead body of child Section + elements

Answer 29

181 CA 61 - Everyone who - disposes of the dead body of a child - in any manner - with intent to conceal the fact of its birth - whether the child died before, during or after birth

Question 30

Which court does a youth facing a charge of murder or manslaughter appear?

Answer 30

Comittal process in the youth court then charges heard in the High Court

Question 31

Who answers a question of law relating to if the condition is a disease of the mind

Answer 31

Judge

Question 32

What the accused state of mind was at time of offence is answered by who?

Answer 32

Jury

Question 33

R v Kamipeli

Answer 33

It does not have to be shown that the defendant was incapable of forming the mens rea, merely that, because of their drunken state, they did not have the proper state of mind to be guilty

Question 34

In infantcide, who decides the mothers state of mind?

Answer 34

Jury

Question 35

Section 153, what is the relevant age of the person who is employed?

Answer 35

16

Question 36

Pursuant to section 22(3)(a) of the criminal disclosure act the notice under subsection (1) must include

Answer 36

name and address of the witness of if it is not known to the defendant then any matter known by the defendant that might be of material assistance in finding the witness

Question 37

``` Manslaughter Section 150A (1) what must prosecution prove ```

Answer 37

very high degree of negligence or gross negligence

Question 38

Proximity is a question of law decided by who?

Answer 38

Judge

Question 39

Written notice of an alibi is to be given by the defendant

Answer 39

Within 10 working days after the defendant is given notice under section 20 Criminal Disclosure Act 2008

Question 40

R V Cox

Answer 40

Consent must be full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form rational judgement

Question 41

Most of the offences in CA 61 require an intent, outline a defence that would be available

Answer 41

intoxication

Question 42

culpability of person involved in suicide pact

Answer 42

Guilty of being a party to an offence

Question 43

Sec 25 CA 61

Answer 43

Ignorance is not a defence nor an excuse for any offence committed

Question 44

Outline M’Naghten’s rules

Answer 44

The M’Naghten’s rules (or test) is frequently used to establish whether or not a defendant is insane. It is based on the person’s ability to think rationally, so that if a person is insane they were acting under such a defect of reason from a disease of the mind that they did not know: * The nature and quality of their actions, or * That what they were doing was wrong.

Question 45

List four statutory legal duties in respect of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 45

* Provide the necessaries and protect from injury (s151) * Provide necessaries and protect from injury to your charges when you are a parent or guardian (s152) * Provide necessaries as an employer (s153) * Use reasonable knowledge and skill when performing dangerous acts, such as surgery (s155) * Take precautions when in charge of dangerous things, such as machinery (s156) * Avoid omissions that will endanger life (s157).

Question 46

List the difference between counselling or attempting to procure murder (s174) and conspiracy to Murder (s175)

Answer 46

Counselling or attempting to procure murder requires that the offence is to be committed in New Zealand, whereas with conspiracy to murder, the murder can take place in New Zealand or elsewhere. Counselling or attempting to procure murder only applies if the murder is not in fact committed, whereas conspiracy to murder applies regardless of whether murder is committed or not.

Question 47

Section 159(1) & (2) of the Crimes Act 1961 defines when a child becomes a human being and is therefore able to be murdered under section 158. Detail the provisions of section 159(1) & (2).

Answer 47

159(1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother, whether it has breathed or not, whether it has an independent circulation or not, and whether the navel string is severed or not. 159(2) the killing of such child is homicide if it dies in consequence of injuries received before, during, or after birth.

Question 48

Define Homicide, Section 158 of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 48

Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever.

Question 49

State the ingredients of infanticide (s178 of the Crimes Act 1961).

Answer 49

Where a woman causes the death of any child of hers under the age of 10 years in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide, and where at the time of the offence the balance of her mind was disturbed, by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that or any other child, or by reason of the effect of lactation, or by reason of any disorder consequent upon childbirth or lactation, to such an extent that she should not be held fully responsible

Question 50

In general, no one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence of the mind. What are the exceptions to this rule?

Answer 50

* Wilfully frightening a child under 16 years of age | * Wilfully frightening a sick person (Mentally or physically)

Question 51

What is meant by the term “justified?” Provide two examples:

Answer 51

* Homicide committed in self-defence (s48) * Homicide committed to prevent suicide or commission of an offence which would be likely to cause immediate and serious injury to the person or property of any one (s41)

Question 52

Why is attempted murder one of the most difficult offences in the Crimes Act 1961 to prove beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer 52

When proving an attempt to commit an offence it must be shown that the accused’s intention was to commit the substantive offence. For example, in a case of attempted murder it is necessary for the Crown to establish an actual intent to kill

Question 53

What are the ingredients to accessory after the fact to murder? Section 176

Answer 53

Knowing any person to have been party to murder, receives, comforts, assists that person or tampers with or actively suppresses evidence against that person in order to enable him to escape after arrest or to avoid conviction.

Question 54

Define the term “Suicide Pact” s180(3) Crimes Act 1961

Answer 54

common agreement between 2 or more persons having for its object the death of all of them, whether or not each is to take his own life; but nothing done by a person who enters into a suicide pact shall be treated as done by him in pursuance of the pact unless it is done while he has the settled intention of dying in pursuance of the pact.

Question 55

How do New Zealand Courts deal with a defence of Automatism arising out of taking alcohol and / or drugs

Answer 55

In New Zealand, the courts are likely to steer a middle course, allowing a defence of automatism arising out of taking alcohol and drugs, to offences of basic intent only. They are likely to disallow the defence where the state of mind is obviously self-induced, the person is blameworthy, and the consequences could have been expected.

Question 56

List the ingredients of Section 48 of the Crimes Act 1961 (Self-defence or defence of another).

Answer 56

Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

Question 57

What was held in R v Ranger

Answer 57

If this accused did really think that the lives of herself and her son were in peril because of the deceased, enraged after the struggle, might attempt to shoot them with a rifle near at hand, then it would be going too far, we think, to say that the jury could not entertain a reasonable doubt as to whether a pre-emptive strike with a knife would be reasonable force in all the circumstances

Question 58

Provide three guidelines in respect of consent regarding assault.

Answer 58

1. Everyone has a right to consent to a surgical operation. 2. Everyone has a right to consent to the infliction of force not involving bodily harm. 3. No one has a right to consent to their death or injury likely to cause death. 4. No one has a right to consent to bodily harm in such a manner as to amount to a breach of the peace, or in a prize fight or other exhibition calculated to collect together disorderly persons. 5. It is uncertain to what extent any person has a right to consent to their being put in danger of death or bodily harm by the act of another

Question 59

In common law, allegations of culpable homicide have been supported where the offenders have caused death by particular circumstances. Name any four of these circumstances.

Answer 59

* Committing arson * Giving a child an excessive amount of alcohol to drink * Placing hot cinders and straw on a drunk person to frighten them * Supplying heroin to the deceased * Throwing a large piece of concrete from a motorway over bridge into the path of an approaching car * Conducting an illegal abortion

Question 60

In relation to Section 160(2)(d) of the Crimes Act 1961,give two practical examples of culpable homicide which has been caused by the victims actions, prompted by threats on fear of violence

Answer 60

1. Jumps or falls out of a window because they think they are going to be assaulted 2. Jumps into a river to escape an attack and drowns 3. Who has been assaulted and believes their life is in danger, jumps from a train and is killed.

Question 61

What is the definition of the period “a year and a day” as outlined in section 162(2) of the Crimes Act 1961?

Answer 61

The period of a year and a day shall be reckoned inclusive of the day on which the last unlawful act contributing to the cause of death took place.

Question 62

Section 168(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961 refers to the term “grievous bodily injury” what does this mean and give an example of such an injury:

Answer 62

harm that is very serious, such as injury to a vital organ To injure means to cause actual bodily harm

Question 63

In the test for proximity, Simester and Brockbanks (Principles of Criminal Law 224) suggest the following questions should be asked in determining the point at which an act of mere preparation of committing a crime may become an attempt. What are those two questions?

Answer 63

* Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he could embark on an actual attempt? Or * Has the offender actually commenced execution; that is to say, has he taken a step in the actual crime itself?

Question 64

Give an example when murder might be reduced to manslaughter even though the accused intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm

Answer 64

Voluntary Manslaughter Mitigating circumstances, such as a suicide pact, reduce what would otherwise be murder to manslaughter, even though the accused may have intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.

Question 65

What is involuntary manslaughter?

Answer 65

Covers those types of unlawful killing in which the death is caused by an unlawful act or gross negligence. In such cases there has been no intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm

Question 66

Define Alibi

Answer 66

“An alibi is the plea in a criminal charge of having been elsewhere at the material time: the fact of being elsewhere”

Question 67

What must the Defendant include in a notice of alibi?

Answer 67

The name and address of the witness or, if the name and address is not known to the defendant when the notice is given, any matter known by the defendant that might be of material assistance in finding that witness

Question 68

Define “Attempts” under section 72(1) of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 68

Every one who, having an intent to commit an offence, does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object, is guilty of an attempt to commit the offence intended, whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not.

Question 69

Explain what is meant by section 160(2)(b) of the Crimes Act 1961, omission to perform a legal duty.

Answer 69

This covers cases where nothing is done when there is a legal duty to act, and certain cases of positive conduct accompanied by a failure to discharge a legal duty, in particular a duty of care.

Question 70

Define “wilfully frightening”

Answer 70

“Wilfully frightening” is regarded as:” intending to frighten, or at least be reckless as to this”. Adams on Criminal Law

Question 71

What are the legal duties of a parent/guardian under section 152 of the Crimes Act 1961?

Answer 71

Every one who is a parent, or is a person in place of a parent, who has actual care or charge of a child under the age of 18 years is under a legal duty— (a) To provide that child with necessaries; and (b) To take reasonable steps to protect that child from injury.

Question 72

What are the ingredients of section 154 of the Crimes Act 1961, abandoning a child under 6

Answer 72

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who unlawfully abandons or exposes any child under the age of 6 years

Question 73

Outline the culpability for children under 10 and children 10-13 years

Answer 73

* Under 10 - A child aged under 10 years has an absolute defence to any charge brought against them. Nevertheless, even though the child cannot be convicted, you still have to establish whether or not they are guilty. * 10-13yrs - For children aged between 10 and 13 years inclusive, it must be shown that the child knew their act was wrong or contrary to law. If this knowledge cannot be shown, the child cannot be criminally liable for the offence

Question 74

What was held in R v Lipman

Answer 74

Where automatism is brought about by a voluntary intake of alcohol or drugs the Court may be reluctant to accept that the actions were involuntary or that the offender lacked intention.

Question 75

What is a “strict liability” offence?

Answer 75

Any offence that does not require an intent is called a strict liability offence and the only way a defendant can escape liability for such an offence is to prove a total absence of fault

Question 76

What 3 points must be satisfied before a defence of compulsion can be used

Answer 76

A person is protected from criminal responsibility if they have been compelled to commit the offence by someone at the scene who had threatened them that they would otherwise be killed or caused grievous bodily harm. The accused must have genuinely believed the threats and must not be a party to any association or conspiracy involved in carrying out the threats.

Question 77

Explain entrapment

Answer 77

Entrapment occurs when an agent of an enforcement body deliberately causes a person to commit an offence, so that person can be prosecuted

Question 78

Give two circumstances where culpable homicide is murder

Answer 78

(a) If the offender means to cause the death of the person killed: (b) If the offender means to cause to the person killed any bodily injury that is known to the offender to be likely to cause death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not: (c) If the offender means to cause death, or, being so reckless as aforesaid, means to cause such bodily injury as aforesaid to one person, and by accident or mistake kills another person, though he does not mean to hurt the person killed: (d) If the offender for any unlawful object does an act that he knows to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he may have desired that his object should be effected without hurting any one

Question 79

Define “Legal Duty”

Answer 79

The expression “legal duty” refers to those duties imposed by statute or common law including uncodified common law duties:

Question 80

Outline section 163 of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 80

No one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence on the mind alone, except by wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person, nor for the killing of another by any disorder or disease arising from such influence, except by wilfully frightening any such child as aforesaid or a sick person.

Question 81

What is required state of mind for section 167(b) of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 81

To show that the accused’s state of mind meets the provisions of s167(b), you must establish that the accused: * Intended to cause bodily injury to the deceased * Knew the injury was likely to cause death * Was reckless as to whether death ensued or not.

Question 82

You cannot use the defence of consent to assault in the following cases

Answer 82

* Aiding suicide * Criminal actions * Injury likely to cause death * Bodily harm likely to cause a breach of the peace * Indecency offences * The placing of someone in a situation where they are at risk of death or bodily harm

Question 83

A hearsay statement is admissible in any proceeding if

Answer 83

(a) the circumstances relating to the statement provide reasonable assurance that the statement is reliable; and (b) either— (i) the maker of the statement is unavailable as a witness; or (ii) the Judge considers that undue expense or delay would be caused if the maker of the statement were required to be a witness

Question 84

Define Automatism

Answer 84

Automatism can best be described as a state of total blackout, during which a person is not conscious of their actions and not in control of them.

Question 85

What is “Sane” and “Insane” Automatism?

Answer 85

Automatism may be quite different and distinct from insanity, although it may be due to a disease of the mind. Hence it is necessary to distinguish between: Sane automatism - The result of somnambulism (sleepwalking), a blow to the head or the effects of drugs Insane automatism - The result of a mental disease

Question 86

What is the Courts view of entrapment?

Answer 86

In New Zealand the courts have rejected entrapment as a defence per se, preferring instead to rely on the discretion of the trial judge to exclude evidence that would operate unfairly against the accused.

Question 87

Outline the subjective and objective tests relating to section 48 of the Crimes Act 1961

Answer 87

Once the accused has decided that use of force was required (a subjective view of the circumstances as the accused believed them), Section 48 then introduces a test of reasonableness which involves an objective view as to the degree and manner of the force used

Question 88

What is the procedure when alibi witnesses are interviewed?

Answer 88

The O/C case should not interview an alibi witness unless the prosecutor requests them to do so. If an interview is requested, follow this procedure. * Advise the defence counsel of the proposed interview and give them a reasonable opportunity to be present * If the accused is not represented, endeavour to ensure the witness is interviewed in the presence of some independent person not being a member of the Police. * Make a copy of a witness’s signed statement taken at any such interview available to defence counsel through the prosecutor. Any information that reflects on the credibility of the alibi witness can be withheld under s16(1)(o).

Question 89

If the Defendant intends to call an expert witness during proceedings, what must they disclose to the Prosecution?

Answer 89

* Any brief of evidence to be given or any report provided by that witness, or * If that brief or any such report is not available, a summary of the evidence to be given and the conclusions of any report to be provided. * This information must be disclosed at least 14 days before the date fixed for the defendants hearing or trial, or within any further time that the court may allow (s23(1))

Question 90

What does section 180(2) state about suicide pacts

Answer 90

Offence for 2 people to enter into a suicide pact where they are both responsible for the actions that caused one of their deaths and one of them survives 5 months imprisonment

Question 91

What subjective criteria are used to asses use of force in plea of self defence

Answer 91

The degree of force used - What re the circumstances that the defendant believes exist - Do you accept that the defendant genuinely believed those facts - is the force reasonable in the circumstances

Question 92

Section 23 - Insanity

Answer 92

Everyone shall be presumed sane at the time of doing or omitting any act until the contrary is proved

Question 93

What three points must be satisfied before a defence of compulsion can be used?

Answer 93

- Belief must be genuine - Presence - Immediacy

Question 94

What does R V CLANCY state?

Answer 94

The best evidence as to the date and place of a childs birth will normally be provided by a person attending at the birth or the childs mother.....,production of the birth certificate, if available, may have added to the evidence but was not essential.

Question 95

What conditions must be met before a statement from a dangerously ill person may be given in evidence?

Answer 95

- If they are dead at the time of the hearing | - Reasonable assurance of statements reliability can be shown

Question 96

Definition of insanity - S23(2)(a)&(b)

Answer 96

No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of an act done or omitted by him when labouring under natural imbecility or disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable - Of understanding the nature and quality of the act or omission OR Of knowing that the act or omission was morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards or right and wrong.

Question 97

Give 3 examples of how intoxication may be defence to the commission of an offence

Answer 97

- Where the intoxication causes a disease of the mind so as to bring s23 (insanity) of the Crimes Act 1961 into effect - If intent is required as an essential element of the offence and the drunkenness is such that the defence can plead a lack of intent to commit the offence - Where the intoxication causes a state of automatism