Murder cases

Question 1

Gibbins and proctor

Answer 1

Facts: A child’s father and his common law wife neglected and starved his child, who died of starvation

Ratio: establishes that an omission or a failure to act is capable of amounting to the actus reus of murder where the defendant has a duty of care towards the victim

Question 2

Attorney general reference (no.3 of 1994) (1997)

Answer 2

Facts: d inflicted stab wounds on girlfriend who was between 22 and 24 weeks pregnant, the foetus was wounded and the girlfriend went into premature labour. The baby died 121 days after birth

Ratio: destroying a foetus whilst in the womb does not constitute murder. Foetus is not classified as a human being

Question 3

R v Clegg

Answer 3

Facts: d shouted at driver but vehicle did not stop. D then fired 3 shots at v’s car which missed the target. D fired again the fourth time, killing one of the passengers in the vehicle

Ratio: where the force used is excessive the killing can amount to murder

Question 4

R v vickers

Answer 4

Facts: v broke into local sweet shop. He came across v an old women who was deaf and attacked her. She died from her injuries

Ratio: An intention to cause gbh is sufficient as the mens rea for murder

Question 5

Dpp v smith

Answer 5

Facts: Police officer leapt onto bonnet of car to prevent d from driving away with stolen goods. D drove at high speed dislodging the officer who was thrown into a path of an oncoming car and was killed

Ratio: objective rather than subjective test for intention

Question 6

R v Moloney

Answer 6

Facts: D shot and killed step father in a drunken challenge

Ratio: d’s foresight of the natural consequences could not be equated to an intention to kill or cause grevious bodily harm

Question 7

R v Nedrick

Answer 7

Facts: d poured paraffin(petrol bomb) through a letter box which caught fire and a child inside of the property was killed

Ratio:

Question 8

R v Woollin

Answer 8

Facts: d threw 3 month old baby onto the ground. The baby suffered a fractured skull from which he then died

Ratio: test for intention is subjective. Court must look at d’s actual state of mind at the time of the actus reus

Question 9

R v white

Answer 9

Facts: d placed poison in mothers drink intending that it would kill her. Before the poison could take effect the v died of an unrelated heart attack

Ratio: d’s conduct has been successfully overtaken by an unrelated cause of death, breaking the chain of causation

Question 10

R v smith

Answer 10

Facts: d stabbed v piercing his lung. Medical professionals failed to notice injury and dropped him twice when moving him to medical station. They then failed to grasp seriousness of v’s injury and prescribed wrong treatment

Ratio: d will remain the legal cause where the original injury caused by the d remains an operating and significant cause

Question 11

R v Cheshire

Answer 11

Facts: d shot v in stomach and thigh. V began to suffer from breathing difficulties and therefore the medical professions have a tracheotomy, v died from a complication

Ratio: when medical treatment constitutes a supervening act which breaks the chain of causation the treatment provided must be so independent of the d’s act and so potent in causing the death that the jury regard d’s act as insignificant

Question 12

R v Blaue

Answer 12

Facts: v refused to have sex with d, as a result d stabbed her. She refused blood transfusion and subsequently died

Ratio: v’s actions did not constitute a novus actus interveniens therefore d was guilty of the offence