murder Flashcards
(33 cards)
1
Q
Homicide offences
A
- Covers a wide range of offences which all result with the death of another human being
- Murder
- Voluntary Manslaughter
- Involuntary Manslaughter
2
Q
The view of murder
A
- Within the Criminal Law and justice system, it is considered to be the most serious crime which a person can commit
- As well as directly leading to the death of the V, murder removes any chance for that victim to experience anything else
- Even amongst homicide, Murder is the most serious – as the D intended to remove life
3
Q
Death penalty and murder
A
- It is due to the gravity of this offence that until relatively recently, the punishment for Murder was the death penalty
- The last use of the Death Penalty was in 1955, when Ruth Ellis was killed for the murder of her boyfriend
- However, the final abolishment of the Death Penalty came in 1998 – when it was abolished for the use of treason, ending it entirely
4
Q
Current sentencing
A
- Murder currently attracts a mandatory life sentence
- This does not equal a lifetime in prison- but is instead made up of ‘tariff period’ which would then be followed with time on license
- License means being technically ‘free’ but there are restrictions and monitored – it is a life sentence as these restrictions will remain for life
5
Q
sentence
A
- The current standard sentence (tariff period) for an ‘unexceptional’ murder is 15 years
6
Q
Defining murder- statute vs common law
A
- Homicide Act 1957
- Coroners and Justice Act 2009
- Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007
- These have all added statutory footing to the offence and cover defences throughout all of the homicide offences
7
Q
Murder definition
A
“Murder is when a man of sound memory, and in the age of discretion unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the Queen’s peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed or implied…”
8
Q
Un-coding the definition
A
- Clearly Lord Coke’s definition, from the 17th Century has little place in the modern view of murder – so an updated version is the most appropriate to follow
- Murder requires…“D to unlawfully kill another person under the Queen’s Peace, and to do so, intending to kill or cause GBH.”
9
Q
Changing from the original definition to current standing
A
- Within Coke’s definition, there was a requirement that the person must die within ‘a year and a day’ of the D’s conduct
- However, with advances in medical treatment and difficulties in proving causal conduct has meant this is no longer appropiate
10
Q
Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996
A
- Changed the year and a day rule
- As long as causation can be established, D can be liable for murder regardless of the delay between their conduct and and the death of V
- Remaining restrictions include considerable delay of three years plus or where the D has already been prosecuted for a non-fatal offence in the same incident
11
Q
Moral issues surrounding Murder
A
- The definition does help with establishing what happened between the D and V
- Moral issues, however, can cloud judgments and cause issues with this idea
- Keep in mind issues such as assisted death, removing pain and similar concerns
12
Q
AR of murder
A
- Murder is a result crime, and therefore there is no need for specification of what exactly the conduct is that D must perform
- It is satisfied by any conduct which causes the death of the V
- The type of conduct is irrelevant, it just remains that it is done
13
Q
Omissions and murder
A
- It is possible to commit murder by omission, so a failure to do something
- As long as the the requirements for that omissions are met, then that is considered to be enough for Murder
14
Q
Gibbins and proctor [1918]
A
- D1 (Gibbins) and D2 (Proctor) failed to feed D1’s 7-year old child, which then resulted in the death of the child
- Both D acted with intent to at least cause serious bodily harm to the V
- Held: Both were held to have been guilty of murder, due to their failure to feed (based off a duty to buy food and a familial duty)
15
Q
Necessary circumstances
A
in order to establish the AR and to align with Lord Coke’s definition, there are certain elements of murder which need to be established
- Without these being fully established, the AR will not be satisfied
16
Q
Under the queens peace
A
- When soldiers kill alien enemies ’in the heat of war, and in actual exercise thereof’
- That killing will not be under the Queen’s peace and therefore, not murder
17
Q
Exceptions
A
- However, this is not a wide exception - in order to protect everyone
- If a soldier kills another, even an alien enemy in a war zone and it is not done in the heat of war
- This will be considered as having been committed under the Queen’s peace and D will satisfy the AR
18
Q
Unlawful killing
A
- For there to be an unlawful killing, it must satisfy all AR and MR elements and be done with no lawful defence
- Where the D kills in self – defence, they aren’t liable for murder
19
Q
V must be a person
A
- The victim must be a human being – and is normally a straightforward discussion
- When does life begin as a human being and when does this end?
20
Q
When does v become a person
A
- An unborn child is not a person within the criminal law
- Therefore, if D kills an unborn child they could be charged with child destruction or procuring a miscarriage but cannot commit murder
- In Law, a person exists when they are ‘fully expelled from the womb’ and alive
- When the D harms a foetus that is subsequently born alive, but then dies from those injuries – D has caused the death of what is a person at the time of death
- However, this interestingly does not apply to mothers who injure their foetus’ through their own actions during pregnancy
21
Q
When does life end?
A
- Medical advances have made determining the end of life significantly more difficult
- V will be considered dead at the point of ‘brain death’ (complete and irreversible non-functioning of the brain stem)
- However, if the V falls short of this – eg a persistent vegetative state, or profound coma – they aren’t considered dead and could still be murdered
22
Q
Causing death
A
- The D acts or omission must be the ones that cause the death
- Causing death also includes the acceleration of death, such as killing a terminally ill patient or someone with only a short time to live
- Thus when someone intentionally ends the life of D in order to relieve pain or suffering, believing V didn’t have long anyway – D still commits murder
23
Q
Euthanasia and assisted suicide
A
- Although they are hotly contested debates within the public sphere both globally and nationally they remain illegal within the UK
- However, medical law does permit withdrawing treatment – generally considered to be good palliative care
- But it is unlawful to do anything which will speed up someone’s death – regardless of the reason as to why the euthanasia is desired
24
Q
MR of murder
A
- Coke’s definition describes the use of ‘malice aforethought’ but that does not apply to any form of modern MR
- The use of malicious is not necessarily relevant – there is no need for some manner of evil character
- Similarly, there is no requirement for ‘aforethought’ – if there is sufficient MR, there is no need for pre-planning
25
Intention
- Intention for murder is the same as it is for any other offences requiring intent
- D intends to kill or cause GBH when their conduct is carried out in order to bring about that result (direct intent) or where their conduct is virtually certain, they foresee as a virtual certainty or the jury finds virtual certainty (oblique intent)
26
MR cont
- The fact that the MR for murder can be satisfied by an intent to cause GBH is important
- This means that murder can be considered to be a constructive liability offence – D’s MR corresponds with an AR with the additional element of causing death
- This is a controversial topic – but is focused on the idea that as soon as D intends to harm, they should be responsible for all the consequences which follow
27
Other MR requirements
- It will only be a murder if their act or omission was performed voluntarily
- They must also know or intend that they are killing a person under the Queen’s peace
28
Defences for murder
- Most of the general defences will apply here, with the exception of duress and duress of circumstances
- If one of these general defences applies, then the satisfaction of that will lead to a complete acquittal
29
Doctors, Medicine and Murder
- One of the main issues regarding medical care is the use of pain-relieving drugs to terminally ill patients with the doctors knowing this is likely to lead to a reduced life expectancy
- It is an incredibly common practice and largely uncontroversial in medical practice
- Technically this should be considered a murder – the AR is satisfied from accelerating the death and the MR is satisfied from knowing that end of life is a virtually certain consequence of their conduct
30
Adams [1957]
- D, a doctor was charged with murder, having ‘eased the passing’ of several patients, including V with strong, pain relieving drugs
- Held: not guilty. There is no special defence for doctors, but ‘he is entitled to do all that is proper and necessary to relieve pain and suffering even if measures he takes may incidentally shorten life.”
31
The doctrine of double effect
- Intentionally causing a harmful result (death) can be morally defensible where it is a side effect of promoting a good end (pain relief)
- It must be that the shortening of life is ‘incidental’
- Doing the same thing to collect inheritance for example, would not be double effect
32
Common law defence
- In line with Adams, we now seem to have a common law defence which allows protection for doctors who prescribe pain relief with the incidental effect of causing death
33
Partial defences
- These form another element of homicide offences, which will be discussed further
- These defences, if successful reduce a murder charge to a manslaughter charge
-
