Topic 2 - Homicide Flashcards
(112 cards)
1
Q
What is homicide?
A
Causing the death of another human being
Homicide is a generic term and includes various offences such as murder and involuntary manslaughter.
2
Q
What distinguishes murder from other forms of homicide?
A
The defendant must act with a specific intent.
3
Q
What is the mandatory sentence for murder under the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965?
A
Mandatory life sentence.
4
Q
How is murder defined in common law?
A
‘Unlawful homicide with malice aforethought’.
5
Q
What are the elements of the actus reus of murder?
A
- Unlawful
- Killing
- Human being
- King’s peace
6
Q
What does ‘unlawful’ mean in the context of murder?
A
The killing must not fall into lawful categories like self-defense or advancement of justice.
7
Q
What are the tests for causation in murder?
A
- Factual cause
- Legal cause
8
Q
What is the factual cause test?
A
‘But for’ the acts or omissions of the defendant, the relevant consequence would not have occurred.
9
Q
What is the legal cause test?
A
The defendant’s act must be the ‘substantial’ cause of the prohibited harm.
10
Q
Who can be a victim in a homicide case?
A
A human being who is ‘in being’.
11
Q
Can a corpse be murdered?
A
No, it is not possible to murder a corpse.
12
Q
What indicates that a person is ‘in being’?
A
Born alive and capable of independent life.
13
Q
What is the mens rea for murder?
A
Malice aforethought.
14
Q
What does malice aforethought mean?
A
- Intention to kill (express malice)
- Intention to cause grievous bodily harm (implied malice)
15
Q
Is mercy killing a defense in English law?
A
No, it is not a defense.
16
Q
What is voluntary manslaughter?
A
A lesser offense for murder with a successful defense of diminished responsibility.
17
Q
What are the four key aspects of diminished responsibility?
A
- Abnormality of mental functioning
- Recognised medical condition
- Substantial impairment of D’s ability
- Provides an explanation for D’s acts and omissions
18
Q
What does ‘abnormality of mental functioning’ refer to?
A
A state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings.
19
Q
Is diminished responsibility available for attempted murder?
A
No, it is not available.
20
Q
What must be proven for diminished responsibility to be a valid defense?
A
The defendant was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning due to a recognised medical condition.
21
Q
What is the meaning of ‘substantial’ in the context of diminished responsibility?
A
Something greater than ‘more than merely trivial’.
22
Q
What does it mean to ‘exercise self-control’ in diminished responsibility?
A
The ability to control one’s actions must be substantially impaired.
23
Q
What is the burden of proof for diminished responsibility?
A
The burden falls upon the defense to prove on the balance of probabilities.
24
Q
What does the Homicide Act 1957, s 2(1) state about diminished responsibility?
A
A person is not to be convicted of murder if suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognised medical condition.
25
What must the abnormality of mental functioning provide?
An explanation for D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing, s 2(1)(c)
## Footnote
It also provides an explanation for D's conduct if it is a significant contributory factor in causing that conduct, s 2(1B) HA 1957.
26
What must be established between the abnormality of mental functioning and the killing?
A causal link must be established
## Footnote
It need not be the only cause; the defence can still operate if the jury considers alcohol may have played a part.
27
What is the significance of uncontested expert medical evidence in a murder case?
A judge should withdraw the murder charge from the jury if the expert medical evidence is uncontested
## Footnote
This was established in R v Brennan [2014] EWCA Crim 2387.
28
What is the special defence available only in relation to murder?
Loss of control
## Footnote
This defence was introduced following the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
29
What are the three key requirements of the loss of control defence?
* D must have lost self-control
* Due to the fear and/or anger qualifying trigger
* A normal person might have acted in a similar way to D
30
What type of defence is loss of control?
It is a partial defence to murder
## Footnote
The burden of proof rests with the prosecution once the issue is raised, CJA 2009, s 54(5).
31
What happens if the loss of control defence is successful?
The conviction is reduced from murder to voluntary manslaughter
## Footnote
This means the defendant will avoid the mandatory life sentence.
32
What does section 54(1) of the CJA 2009 stipulate regarding the loss of self-control?
D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing must result from D's loss of self-control
## Footnote
It also requires a qualifying trigger.
33
What defines the qualifying trigger for loss of control?
The loss of self-control must be attributable to D's fear of serious violence or to extremely grave circumstances that cause D to feel seriously wronged
## Footnote
This is outlined in CJA 2009, s 55.
34
What must the defendant fear for the fear trigger to apply?
Serious violence
## Footnote
This is specified in CJA 2009, s 55(3).
35
What are the limitations on relying on the anger trigger?
* D cannot rely on it if he incited it as an excuse to use violence
* The thing said/done cannot constitute sexual infidelity
36
What is required for the anger trigger to be valid?
There must be things said and/or done that constitute circumstances of an extremely grave nature
## Footnote
They must cause D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
37
What is the normal person test as per CJA 2009, s 54(1)(c)?
A person of D's sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint in D's circumstances might have reacted similarly to D.
38
What does the phrase 'circumstances of an extremely grave nature' imply?
It must be determined objectively and should not be established easily
## Footnote
Ordinary trials and disappointments of life do not qualify.
39
What does the requirement of a 'justifiable sense of being seriously wronged' entail?
It must accord with contemporary society's norms and values
## Footnote
A normal person in contemporary Britain would not consider trivial matters as serious wrongs.
40
What does the CJA 2009, s 54(1)(c) state about the normal person test?
'A person of D's sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D.'
41
What are the two steps a jury must assess in the normal person test?
* The gravity of the qualifying trigger to a person in the defendant’s circumstances * Whether a normal person might have done what the defendant did or something similar
42
What did Lord Diplock say regarding the gravity of the qualifying trigger in DPP v Camplin?
'To taunt a person because of his race, his physical infirmities or some shameful incident in his past may well be considered by the jury to be more offensive to the person addressed.'
43
What is the test for determining the proportionality of D’s reaction?
It remains a wholly-objective one.
44
What characteristics or circumstances are excluded when assessing the normal person's capacity for tolerance and self-restraint?
* Bad temper * Intoxication * Extreme sensitivity * Post-traumatic stress disorder * Personality disorder
45
What did the court rule regarding the consideration of sexual infidelity in the context of loss of control?
Sexual infidelity can be taken into account if it is not the sole qualifying trigger.
46
What is the significance of R v Rejmankski regarding mental disorders in the normal person test?
A mental disorder can be relevant to the defendant’s conduct but not to the question of tolerance and self-restraint.
47
What does the defence of loss of control allow in murder cases?
It can reduce a murder charge to voluntary manslaughter if the defendant acted under a loss of control.
48
What are the three aspects of loss of control?
* D lost self-control * D acted as a result of a qualifying trigger * A normal person might have done the same or similar
49
What are the limitations on the use of the defence of loss of control?
* Cannot stem from considered desire for revenge * Cannot be used as an excuse to use violence * Cannot rely on sexual infidelity * Not available for attempted murder
50
What does the CJA 2009, s 54(4) state about revenge?
The defence cannot be used if it stems from an act of revenge.
51
What does CJA 2009, s 55(6) state regarding inciting violence?
* D's fear of serious violence is disregarded if caused by something D incited * A sense of being seriously wronged is not justifiable if D incited the act
52
What is the ruling of R v Clinton about sexual infidelity as a qualifying trigger?
Sexual infidelity is disregarded only when it is the sole qualifying trigger.
53
What does the law state about intoxication in relation to murder and voluntary manslaughter?
Intoxication can negate mens rea for murder and can influence defences like loss of control.
54
What did Lord Judge state regarding intoxication and the loss of control defence in R v Asmelash?
The loss of control defence must be approached without reference to the defendant's voluntary intoxication.
55
In R v Morhall, what was the court's ruling about addiction and provocation?
Addiction was relevant for assessing the gravity of provocation but not for the loss of control defence.
56
What does the defence of loss of control require for a successful argument?
The prosecution must fail to disprove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was acting under a loss of control.
57
Fill in the blank: The defence of loss of control cannot be used if the defendant has a _______ for revenge.
[considered desire]
58
True or False: Intoxication can completely prevent a defendant from using the loss of control defence.
False
59
What is the relevance of intoxication according to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?
Intoxication is relevant if it connects to D’s general capacity for tolerance or self-restraint and the qualifying trigger.
60
How does intoxication affect the defence of diminished responsibility?
Intoxication can be either independent of the abnormality or due to alcohol dependency syndrome (ADS).
61
What must the jury consider when a defendant's intoxication is independent of their mental abnormality?
The jury must determine if the defendant was suffering from mental abnormality and if it substantially impaired their mental responsibility.
62
What did the Court of Appeal state in R v Dowds regarding voluntary acute intoxication?
Voluntary acute intoxication cannot be relied upon to found diminished responsibility.
63
What must the jury decide regarding alcohol dependency syndrome (ADS) when considering diminished responsibility?
The jury must assess if ADS was a significant factor in the defendant's alcohol consumption and its impact on mental responsibility.
64
What factors should the jury consider in cases involving ADS according to R v Stewart?
* Extent and seriousness of dependency
* Ability to control drinking
* Capability of abstinence
* Reasons for drinking
* Drinking pattern leading to the killing.
65
What is the definition of unlawful act manslaughter?
It occurs when the accused kills someone while committing an unlawful act without the mens rea for murder.
66
What are the four requirements for unlawful act manslaughter as established in DPP v Newbury and Jones?
* The act must be intentional
* The act must be unlawful
* The act must be dangerous
* The act must cause death.
67
What type of unlawful act qualifies for unlawful act manslaughter?
The unlawful act must be a criminal act and intrinsically unlawful.
68
According to R v Franklin, can a civil wrong constitute an unlawful act for manslaughter?
No, the unlawful act must be criminal.
69
What did R v Lamb establish about the nature of the unlawful act?
The unlawful act must be independent of the death caused.
70
What is the significance of Andrews v DPP regarding the nature of the unlawful act?
The act must be intrinsically unlawful and not merely a lawful act performed with carelessness.
71
Can a person be guilty of unlawful act manslaughter by omission?
No, it must be an act rather than an omission.
72
What is the test for determining if an act is dangerous in unlawful act manslaughter?
The act must be such that sober and reasonable people would recognize it as likely to cause some harm.
73
What case clarified that the type of harm from an unlawful act must be physical?
R v Dawson (1985).
74
What did R v JM & SM establish about the foreseeability of harm?
The type of harm foreseen does not have to be the same as that which actually occurred.
75
In R v Dawson, what was the issue concerning the knowledge of the reasonable person?
The reasonable person must have the same knowledge as the accused at the time of the offence.
76
What does R v Watson illustrate about the dangerousness of an act?
A defendant can become liable if they become aware of a fact during the commission of the offence that makes the act dangerous.
77
Fill in the blank: The unlawful act must be _______.
[criminal].
78
True or False: An intoxicated person can never use the defence of loss of control.
False.
79
What was the outcome of the Court of Appeal in the case of the robbery attempt?
The Court of Appeal overturned the conviction due to jury misdirection.
80
In R v Watson, what caused the elderly man's death?
The elderly man died of a heart attack after confronting the defendants during a burglary.
81
What did the Court of Appeal determine about the defendants' awareness of the elderly man in R v Watson?
A reasonable person would have realized the act was dangerous once they became aware of the elderly man.
82
In R v Ball, what mistake did the defendant claim regarding the cartridges?
The defendant claimed he mistakenly thought he had loaded a blank cartridge.
83
What must be proven regarding causation in unlawful act manslaughter?
Both factual and legal causation must be established.
84
Define factual causation in the context of unlawful act manslaughter.
'But for' the acts of the accused, the consequence would not have occurred.
85
What is the definition of legal causation?
The defendant must be the 'operating and substantial' cause of the prohibited consequence.
86
What distinguishes direct administration of drugs from mere supply in unlawful act manslaughter?
Direct administration involves injecting the drug, while mere supply involves giving the drug for self-administration.
87
What was the significance of the case R v Kennedy regarding drug supply?
It clarified the limits of liability for suppliers when the victim self-administers drugs.
88
What was the ruling in R v Cato regarding consent?
Consent by the victim was no defense to the unlawful act of administering a noxious thing.
89
What is the primary requirement for gross negligence manslaughter?
The defendant must have breached a duty of care owed to the victim.
90
What does the term 'gross negligence' imply in the context of manslaughter?
A breach of duty that shows such disregard for life and safety as to amount to a crime.
91
List the basic requirements for gross negligence manslaughter as established in R v Adomako.
* Existence of a duty of care
* Breach of that duty
* Breach causes death
* Risk of death
* Breach of duty is gross negligence
92
What does the term 'novus actus interveniens' refer to?
An intervening act that breaks the chain of causation.
93
True or False: The reasonable person standard includes any special knowledge the defendant has.
True.
94
Fill in the blank: The unlawful act must have both _______ and _______ caused the death of the victim.
factual causation, legal causation
95
What is the legal basis for establishing a duty of care in criminal cases?
The defendant can still have a duty of care even in criminal cases, despite such liability being avoided in tort.
96
What was the outcome of R v Wacker regarding duty of care in a criminal enterprise?
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, stating it was inappropriate to apply the tortious principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio in a criminal action.
97
In Adomako, what is the standard used to determine if a defendant breached their duty of care?
The standard is whether the defendant's acts fell below the standard expected of a reasonable person.
98
What are the two aspects of causation that must be proved by the prosecution?
* Factual causation
* Legal causation
99
Define factual causation as per the requirements in criminal law.
'But for' the acts or omissions of the accused, the relevant consequence would not have occurred.
100
What does legal causation require in criminal cases?
The defendant must be the ‘operating and substantial’ cause of the prohibited consequence.
101
What is meant by 'substantial' in the context of causation?
A cause which is more than de minimis, more than minimal.
102
What is meant by 'operating' in the context of causation?
There is no novus actus interveniens or intervening act which breaks the chain of causation.
103
What did Lord Mackay refer to regarding the risk of death in Adomako?
He quoted the test in Bateman, which refers to a disregard for the ‘life and safety of others.'
104
What was established in R v Misra and Srivastava regarding the risk of death?
There must be an obvious and serious risk not merely of injury or serious injury, but of death.
105
What was the key issue in R v Rose that led to the overturning of a conviction?
The element of the offence regarding the obvious and serious risk of death was not fulfilled.
106
What does the term 'gross negligence' imply in legal context?
Conduct that shows such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the State.
107
What did the House of Lords state about the distinction between civil negligence and criminal gross negligence?
The infinite variety of circumstances precludes any more precise definition, leaving the issue to the jury.
108
What was the significant factor in R v Litchfield regarding gross negligence?
The captain's conduct was deemed so bad and obviously wrong that it could be condemned as criminal.
109
What principle was upheld in R v Bateman regarding criminal negligence?
Negligence must show such disregard for life and safety that it amounts to a crime deserving punishment.
110
What is the significance of the defendant's state of mind in establishing gross negligence?
The defendant's state of mind is not required but is relevant, especially if they showed awareness of the risk.
111
What may deter a conviction for gross negligence if the defendant's mistakes are partly due to others?
Mistakes by others contributing to the defendant's errors.
112
What criteria were established for determining gross negligence in various cases?
* Series of acts/omissions
* Mistakes caused by others
* Clear personal responsibility
* Knowledge of danger
* No requirement for mental state
