Unit 3 - Murder

Question 1

What does homicide mean?

Answer 1

It is a generic term for unlawful killings where the defendant is criminally liable for a victims death.

Question 2

What are the different types of mansalughter?

Answer 2

Voluntary, unlawful act, gross negligence and corporate

Question 3

What is the actus reus common to all homicide offences?

Answer 3

The accused has caused the death of a human being. This is often easily proven.

Question 4

What are the conditions for the actus reus of homicide?

Answer 4

THE VICTIM MUST BE A HUMAN BEING. must be legally recognised as a human being. For a foetus, this has been determined in R v Poulton, where it must be wholly expelled from the mother’s body, alive and have an existence independent of the mother (drawn breath).

Question 5

What matters most in cases where someone hurts a foetus inside the womb?

Answer 5

The time of death (whether it was outside of womb); and not the time of injury.

Question 6

What did the case of R v Malcherek and Steel 1981 determine - legal definition of death?

Answer 6

It established the legal definition of death as: the irreversible death of the brain stem. Once the brain stem death occurs, the body is legally considered dead even on life support.

Question 7

Does causation and life support conflict?

Answer 7

No, disconnecting life support from someone brain dead does not break the chain of causation.

Question 8

How is causation measured?

Answer 8

Same as others. Factual and legal causation.

Question 9

What is the conviction for murder?

Answer 9

Mandatory life sentence, but there is a minimum term after which they may be released.

Question 10

What is the men’s Rea for murder?

Answer 10

R v Maloney: either an intention to kill or an intention to cause gbh. The test of intention is subjective.

Question 11

Can intention for men’s Rea of murder be direct or indirect?

Answer 11

Direct: Maloney - the defendant desired the outcome as their aim or purpose
Indirect: the defendants primary aim was something else but they foresaw the death or GbH as a virtually certain consequence.

Question 12

What is the difference between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter?

Answer 12

Voluntary: where the defendant has the men’s Rea for murder but successfully raised a partial defence.
Involuntary: where the defendant does not have the men’s Rea for murder but causes death due to a criminal act/ gross negligence.

Question 13

What are the three partial defences for murder (only) that reduce a charge to voluntary manslaughter?

Answer 13

Diminished responsibility
Loss of control
Suicidal pact

Question 14

What is the defence for diminished responsibility?

Answer 14

Although they have the AR and MR, they were suffering from a recognised medical condition. The legal burden to prove this is on the defendant (on the balance of probabilities).

Question 15

What must the defence prove in a diminished responsibility case?

Answer 15

An abnormality of mental functioning, which; b. Arose from a recognised medical condition; and c. Substantially impaired the d’s ability to understand the nature of their conduct, and or form a rational judgement/ exercise self control; and d. Provides an explanation for the defendants acts and omissions.

Question 16

What must be the case for the partial defence of diminished responsibility to succeed?

Answer 16

The abnormality must have been at least a significant contributory factor in causing the defendant to do as he did. It need not be the only, main or most important factor, but must be more than merely trivial.

Question 17

What the Dietschmann case show about diminished responsibility?

Answer 17

The abnormality of mind did not need to be the sole cause of the defendants acts. The jury considers if the abnormality substantially impaired mental responsibility despite being intoxicated. Can be both.

Question 18

What is the links between intoxication and diminished responsibility defence??

Answer 18

R v Dowds: voluntary acute intoxication cannot form the basis of diminished responsibility.
R v Wood: voluntary alcohol consumption does not automatically stop a diminished responsibility plea if they have an alcohol dependence. The jury should focus exclusively on the alcohol consumed as a result of their illness and not the effect of any alcohol consumed voluntarily.

Question 19

DR defence: what does “substantial impairment” mean?

Answer 19

“Important or weighty”. A minor impairment is insufficient.

Question 20

What is the causal link for diminished responsibility?

Answer 20

The abnormality of mental functioning must be a significant contributory factor in causing the victims contact, but need not be the only factor (more than trivial).

Question 21

What is the insanity defence?

Answer 21

It is a complete defence.

Question 22

What does the partial defense of loss of control cover?

Answer 22

Acknowledges that individuals have a breaking point where they lose self-control due to extreme circumstances

Question 23

What are the three key elements of a loss of control defence?

Answer 23

ALL 3 MUST BE SATISFIED
1. The d must have lost control
2. The loss of control must have had a qualifying trigger
3. A person of the defendants sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint in the circumstances of the defendant might have reacted in a similar way.

Question 24

Loss of control: need the reaction be a sudden one?

Answer 24

No, this helps in cases of a build up of emotion like domestic violence. The greater the deliberation, the less likely it will be deemed a loss of control.

Question 25

Loss of cntr

Question 26

What is the burden of proof for loss of control?

Answer 26

Unlike diminished responsibility, the defendant only needs to present some evidence that raises the defence. Once the defendant provides this evidence, the burden shift to the prosecution to disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the defence can only be presented to a jury if there is sufficient evidence in the opinion of the trial judge

Question 27

LofControl: part 1 - the defendant must lose control

Answer 27

The jury must be satisfied that this particular defendant lost control not just that a reasonable person would have. It does not require a sudden fit of rage. It may be the combination of events overtime like in abuse cases.

Question 28

What are some indicative factors of revenge instead of loss of control?

Answer 28

Arming oneself with a weapon evidence of planning and significant delay between provocation and killing.

Question 29

What are the two types of qualifying trigger?

Answer 29

There can be fear and anger triggers.

Question 30

What is the fear trigger?

Answer 30

This states that the loss of control was attributable to the defendants fear of serious violence from the victim against the defendant. It is objectively assessed by the jury. It does not need to be reasonable just be believable.

Question 31

What is the anger trigger?

Answer 31

When the defendants loss of control was attributable to things said and done that amounted to circumstances of an extremely grave character and caused the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.