Homicide Law - Defenses Flashcards
(39 cards)
Define Justified
Justified means that a person is not guilty of an offence and is not liable civilly
What does “Protected from criminal responsibility” mean?
“Protected from criminal responsibility” means the person is not guilty of an offence but civil liability may still arise.
Defense for children under 10 years old
a person who is under the age of 10 cannot be found guilty of committing a crime.
A child aged under 10 years has an absolute defence to any charge brought against them.
Even though the child cannot be convicted, you still have to establish whether or not they are guilty.
Defense for children under 10 - 14 years old
A person who is between the ages of 10 and 14 cannot be found guilty of committing a crime unless they knew that what they did or didn’t do was wrong or against the law. You must prove the act, intent and knowledge.
What is required for Proof of age
Proof of age
The prosecution is required to produce evidence of age (for example, a birth certificate) and provide evidence that identifies the defendant as the person named in the certificate. The relevant age is that of the child at the time they committed the offence, not their age when they appear in court.
R v Forrest & Forrest
The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof of the victims age.
What is R v Clancy
The complainants date of birth given by their mother is sufficient to prove age.
How are court proceedings handled for 10-13 year olds charged with murder or manslaughter?
They will appear in Youth Court on their first appearance. The matter will automatically transferred to the high court for trial and sentencing.
They can be sentenced to imprisonment or be detained in OT residence for:
- murder / manslaughter
- Cat 3 / 4 offences which old a term of 14 years or life imprisonment.
Who should you seek advice from in relation to questioning children and your persons?
The district youth prosecutor to ensure compliance with the OT act.
Elements of Insanity
(1) Every one shall be presumed to be sane at the time of doing or omitting any act until the contrary is proved.
(2) No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of
- any 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—
(a) Of understanding the nature and quality of the act or omission; or
(b) Of knowing that the act or omission was morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong.
Who can raise the issue of insanity?
Defense is responsible for bringing up the issue of insanity in a trial, and the prosecution is not allowed to provide evidence of insanity even if the accused person claims that they were not in their right mind at the time of the alleged crime.
A judge may also (in exceptional circumstances), put the issue of insanity before the jury.
Who has the burden of prove insanity?
Because the law assumes the defendant is sane, it is up to the defence to prove they are insane.
What is R v Cottle (insanity)
The defendant is not required to prove a defence of insanity beyond reasonable doubt, but instead on the balance of probabilities.
What is R v Clark
The decision as to an accused’s insanity is always for the jury to decide. A verdict inconsistent with medical evidence is not necessarily unreasonable.
Where unchallenged medical evidence is supported by the surrounding facts a jury’s verdict must be founded on that evidence that the accused did not know their act was morally wrong.
What is M’Naghten’s Test
A person is considered insane if they are, 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.
What is not included as a “Disease of the mind”
“Disease of the mind” does not include a temporary mental disorder, such as a blow on the head, drugs, alcohol, anaesthetic, or hypnotism.
Disease of the mind is not a medical question but a legal one for the Judge to decide.
What is R v Codere
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.
Insanity - Morally wrong test
The test is that the defendant knew that their acts were morally wrong – they do not need to know that they were legally wrong.
Consequences for Mentally impaired persons
Under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003, someone found unfit to stand trial or acquitted on account of his or her insanity may be detained as a special patient or special care recipient.
Define Automatism
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.
What is R v Cottle (Automatism)?
Doing something without knowledge of it and without memory afterwards of having done it - a temporary lapse of consciousness that nevertheless, leaves the person so affected able to exercise bodily movements.
What is the Culpability for action done during Automatism?
Actions performed in a state of automatism are involuntary and the common law rule is that there is no criminal liability for such conduct.
What is the courts view on Automatism caused by alcohol or drugs?
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.
The defence is available if the defences evidence clearly raises the issue,
What are the two types of Automatism?
- Sane Automatism - eg. sleepwalking , blow to the head or drugs.
- Insane Automatism - The result of a mental disease
