U1B: Homicide: Murder Flashcards
(24 cards)
Who defined Law?
-Lord Coke
What is the punishment for Murder?
-Life inprisonment
What is the definition of Murder?
'’Murder is when a man..unlawfully killeth…any reasonable creature of rerum natura under the king’s peace, with malice afterthought, express or implied’’
What does rerum natura mean?
-Existence
What Act defines what a ‘reasonable person’ is?
AG Reference No 3 of 1994
How does AG Reference No 3 of 1994 define a ‘reasonable person in being’?
-V must be a HUMAN who is born + not dead
Whatis a case example for a ‘Reasonable Person in Being’ + what was the outcome?
-R v Malcherek: example of person who is NOT a reasonable person in being + NON BREAK IN COC:
-Doctor switching a life support machine= NOT murder
What does ‘unlawful killing’ include?
-Self Defence/authorised killing
-Omissions
What are the Omissions + Cases?
Stone and Dobinson: voluntary assumption
Gibbins and Proctor: family relationship
R v Miller: creating a dangerous situation
R v Pittwood: Contractual duty
R v Dytham: Duty through Official Position
Through Statute
What was the OLD rule for AR and what was this abolished by?
OLD RULE= that victim must die within a year and a day
ABOLISHED= by the Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996.
How is AR established?
Rules of Factual + Legal Causation apply: D must cause death
No actus Interveniens
No break in Chain
What are the cases for the FACTUAL CAUSATION + ruling?
R v White: Introduced Concept of But For test
R v Pagett: Showed test in action
What are ALL the cases for the LEGAL CAUSATION, COC + rulings?
R v Kimsey: has to be more than a slight or trifling link between the cause and the outcome AND ‘De minimis principle’: More than minimal
R v Hughes: Culpable Act
NO ACTUS INTERVENIENS: INDEPENDENT + SERIOUS ENOUGH:
Third party acts:
Jordan: BREAK: Medical treatment= palpably wrong
Cheshire: NONBREAK: Act not independent of Victim’s
Malcherek:NONBREAK: Switching off Life Support= Doesn’t break act
Victims own act:
Williams= BREAK: so extreme, unforeseeable
Roberts= NON-BREAK: Was foreseeable
Thin skull rule: Blaue: Personal characteristsics render
What are the 3 ways to establish the MR of Murder?
1) DIRECT INTENTION: D intends to cause the V’s death
or
- DIRECT INTENTION: D intends to seriously harm V
(GBH)
or - INDIRECT INTENTION: The death/ serious harm of V is almost certain as a result of D’s actions
What case establishes that MR of GBH is sufficient for Murder?
- R v Vickers
What is the official wording, in Coke’s definition, of MR?
“Malice aforethought, express or implied.”
What is the MEANING of Coke’s definition of MR?
-EXPRESS MALICE= DIRECT Intention
IMPLIED MALICE= INDIRECT Intention
AFORETHOUGH= at time of crime
SO: INDIRECT/DIRECT INTENTION to kill or cause GBH at the TIME of the crime
What is Express Malice?
-Express Malice= Intention to kill; to willfully and with premediation intend to cause harm to another
What is Implied Malice?
-When there is no considerable provocation
What is Direct Intention/Express Malice for murder + the TWO cases with their quotes?
D’s ‘aim, purpose or
desire’ is to kill
(
R v Moloney: ‘‘true desire to bring about the consequences’’
R v Mohan: ‘‘decision to bring about commission of an offence’’
How can one test Indirect/OBLIQUE Intention when direct intention is not found + WHAT CASE is this from?
Virtual Certainty Test:
-Was death or serious harm a ‘‘virtual certainty’’? (Objective)
-And did D appreciate such was a case? (Subjective)
FROM R V WOOLIN
What are TWO cases that example INDIRECT INTENTION for Murder?
-Hancock and Shankland
-Matthews and Alleyne
What was the ruling in Matthews and Alleyne for INDIRECT Intention?
Foresight of consequences = EVIDENCE ONLY: does not prove it is present
What was the Lord + Quote in Hancock and Shankland for INDIRECT intention?
-LORD LANE:
‘‘Where a man realises that it is… inevitable that his actions will result in death or serious harm, however little he may have desired or wished it to happen.”
