Murder

Question 1

What is the definition of murder?

Answer 1

The unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under the King’s peace with malice aforethought either express or implied

Question 2

What is the layman’s definition of murder?

Answer 2

Unlawful killing of a person with intent to

Question 3

What is the first step we must undertake to prove murder

Answer 3

Prove that D’s act/omission caused V’s death

Question 4

What are the 5 cases/duties where someone can be found guilty under omission

Answer 4

1. Public office (R v DYTHAM)
2. Family member (R V GIBBONS & PROCTOR)
3. Voluntary assumption (R V STONE & DOBINSON)
4. Creates dangerous situation (R v MILLER)
5. Contractual duty (R v PITWOOD)

Question 5

What are the 2 types of causation?

Answer 5

Factual - but for test (R v PAGETT / R v WHITE)

Legal - operative and substantial test (R v SMITH)

Question 6

What are the 3 types of intervening acts?
What must they be?

Answer 6

1. Acts of third party (R v PAGETT / R v JORDAN*)
2. Acts of victim (R v WILLIAMS ❌ R v ROBERTS ✅)
3. Acts of god (earthquakes etc)

Must be UNREASONABLE and UNFORSEEABLE in order to break the chain of causation.

*PALPABLY WRONG (for medical cases)

Question 7

What is TSR?

Answer 7

Thin skull rule - D. must take V. as they find them (R v BLAUE)

Question 8

What are the 3 parts to the AR of murder

Answer 8

1. Killing was unlawful
2. V. was reasonable creature in being
3. Killing was under Kings peace

Question 9

What is the 1st part of proving murder?

Answer 9

Killing must be unlawful

Killing can be lawful in scenarios such as police action, war, DNR orders or self-defense.

Question 10

In which case did a person shoot at for intruders who were running away?

Answer 10

R v Martin

Use of NECESSARY force in self defence may mean the killing is lawful

Question 11

What must be necessary to discuss when mentioning self defence

Answer 11

Lawful self defence must have necessary force to make killing lawful

However, if the force used is deemed unnecessary, it may be considered unlawful.

Question 12

What is the definition of a reasonable creature in being?

Answer 12

Essentially, a human.

V. must be in between birth & death

Question 13

According to AG Reference (No. 3 of 1994), when does life begin?

Answer 13

Life begins once you are fully expelled from the womb and capable of existence independent of the mother

This relates to the legal status of a fetus in murder cases.

Question 14

In R v Malcharek and Steel, what signifies the end of life?

Answer 14

Life ends after brainstem death

This case addresses the legal definition of death.

Question 15

What was established in Airedale NHS Trust v Bland regarding patients in a persistent vegetative state?

Answer 15

Life sustaining treatment can be withdrawn with court permission

It must be in the patient’s best interest to do so, even if the brain stem is alive.

Question 16

When exactly can treatment be withdrawn

Answer 16

Life sustaining treatment can be withdrawn from a patient in a persistent vegetative state as long as the court has given permission and it is in the patient’s best interest to do so

Question 17

3rd element of AR of murder?

Answer 17

Killing under the Kings peace

Question 18

What does DPP v Clegg show?

Answer 18

UK must have officially declared war on another COUNTRY in order to not be under the king peace

Question 19

What is the mens rea for murder

Answer 19

Malice aforethought, either express or implied

This encompasses both direct and oblique intent.

Question 20

What is the definition of express malice?

Answer 20

Intended to kill

Express malice refers to a clear intention to cause death.

Question 21

What does implied malice refer to?

Answer 21

Intent to cause GBH (serious harm)

Implied malice does not require the intent to kill, but rather the intent to cause serious bodily harm.

Question 22

What case established the precedent for implied malice?

Answer 22

R v Vickers

In this case, a burglar killed a shop owner

Question 23

What are the two types of intent mentioned?

Answer 23

Direct intent and oblique intent

Direct intent is when the defendant aims to bring about a specific consequence, while oblique intent involves consequences that are virtually certain.

Question 24

Define direct intent in the context of mens rea.

Answer 24

D aimed to bring consequence

This is illustrated in the case of R v MOHAN.

Question 25

Define oblique intent in the context of mens rea.

Answer 25

Consequences of D's actions were virtually certain, and D realized this ## Footnote This principle is established in the case of R v WOOLLIN.

Question 26

True or False: Both implied and express malice can have direct or oblique intent.

Answer 26

True ## Footnote This means that either form of malice can be established through different types of intent.

Question 27

Malice Aforethought Diagram

Answer 27

Question 28

transferred malice meaning + **case 1** + **case 2**

Answer 28

court takes MR from intended V. to who suffered AR; ONLY LIKE OFFENCES (eg only building/only person) **R v Latimer (1886)** -bar fight -man shouldve been hit; woman hit -MR transferred **R v Pembilton (1874)** -threw stones into crowd -broke window -NOT a like offence (building vs person) NOT GUILTY

Question 29

courts can force contemporaneity - meaning? theory 1 **case**. theory 2 **case**

Answer 29

can force principle of coincidence - make MR and AR coincide Single Act Transaction theory - MR B4 AR **R v Thabo-Meli (1954)** -beat v. -thought he was dead -threw over cliff to dispose, then he died Continuing Act Theory - AR B4 MR **Fagan v MPC (1964)** -ran over foot accidentally -stayed on it