Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

Murder and Voluntary Manslaughter Revision Sheet
Murder is a common law offence and thus has no statutory definition
...


ei g a d u de the Ki g s pea e ith

ali e

Actus reus
Unlawful Killing
Some killings may be lawful i
...
in self-defence or when it as u de the ki g s peace

Omissions
Some killings can result from an omission when there is a duty to act
...
Examples include,
Gibbins and Proctor 1918 – Duty arising from the relationship between a parent and a child
Pitwood 1902 – Contractual duty
Miller 1983 – Duty arising from creating a dangerous situation

A reasonable person in being
This raises the issue of when a person becomes a human being, and seizes to be, from a legal
perspective
...


ai dead patie ts so it ould see

the a e ot

Malcherek and Steel 1981 – Two separate cases where doctors turning off life support did not break
the chain of causation and the doctors were not liable for unlawful homicide
...


Under the King’s peace
The simply means at times when not at war
...


Causation
The normal rules of factual causation (White 1910/ Pagett 1983) apply, as well as the normal rules of
legal causation (Cheshire 1991)
...

Blaue 1975 – V, a Jeho ah s Wit ess, efused a lood t a sfusio follo i g a sta
an intervening act as the D must take his victim as he finds it
...
This as ot

Intervening act (novus actus interveniens)
It is possible for the chain of causation to be broken if an intervening act leads D to no longer be the
operating and substantial cause of death (legal causation)
...

Roberts 1971 – Jumping out of a moving car to avoid sexual assault did not break the chain of
causation
Williams 1991 – Jumping out of a moving car to avoid a wallet being stolen was unreasonable and
did break the chain of causation
...
Case law has identified
extensions to this definition
...
e
...

Afo ethought does ot eed a
after the killing
...
This was established in Vickers 1957
...
This was sufficient mens rea for murder
...
Implied intention can also be found easily in
most cases as in Vickers, where the intention can be inferred where D clearly intended to cause
serious injury
...
The case law regarding the foresight of
consequence has developed over time
...
It was held that nothing less than actual
intention to kill or cause GBH can satisfy the mens rea of murder
...
It was held that the foresight of consequence could indeed
amount to intention, but this is for the jury to consider
...
The Court of Appeal suggested that the jury should consider
2 uestio s…
-

Do they feel that death o se ious i ju
as a i tuall e tai esult of D s a tio s?
Did the accused foresee that this was a virtually certain result?

If the answer to both is yes then intention can be inferred
...


Woolin 1998 – D killed his baby in a fit of temper, it was held that the test developed in Nedrick
should epla e the o d i fe fo fi d

---