Changing the way you learn

Homicide Notes

Homicide Act 1957; amended by S.52 Coroner's and Justice Act 2009
Actus Reus: D caused V's death
1. Mens Rea: Malice Aforethought = intention to kill or cause GBH
  1. Murder
    1. Murder attracts a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment
      1. Defined as 'Unlawful killing of a human being under the Queens Peace with malice aforethought
    2. Actus Reus: usually by a voluntary act but can be an ommission (Gibbins & Proctor)
      1. Causation: Factual -'But for' (White) Legal - De minimis principle (Paggett) -Intervening acts - Thin Skull
    3. Mens Rea: Intention to kill or cause serious harm
      1. by means of either:
        Direct intent (must be clear) judges use simple direction. D's aim and purpose (Mohan)
        Oblique intent - evidential rule Judges give Nedrick/Woollin direction to the jury. If jury is satisfied that D foresaw death or serious injury as a virtually cirtain consequence - strong evidence, a jury can find intention (Mattews and Alleyne)
  2. Special and Partical Defenses that reduce murder to manslaughter: 1. Diminished Responsability 2. Loss of Control
2. No Malice Aforethought
  1. Unlawful Act Manslaughter
    1. Actus Reus: *1. D commits an unlawful act, *2.Act must be dangerous to an objective standard, *3. Act must cause death
      1. Mens Rea for Unalwful act manslaughter is the Mens Rea required for the unlawful act... (subjective recklessness)
        Unlawful act: *A. Must be a criminal offence, not a breach of civil law (Franklin), *B. Must be an act not an ommission (Lowe), *C. Act must be unlawful itself, not become unlawful (Jennings), *D. AR and MR of 'base crime' must be proved in full (Lamb), *E. Unlawful act can be any criminal offence (Mitchell)
        Dangerous Act: meaning of Dangerous = Church test and Dowson. An act all sober and reasonable people recognise carries the risk of 'some harm' although not serious harm. (reasonable person can only have the same knowledge as the D (Dawson/Watson))
        Act must cause death (causation): Factual 'But for' (White), Legal - De minimis principle, -Intervening acts, - Thin skull rule
    2. Drug cases - Kennedy No.2 - Adult taking drugs breaks the chain. Children and mentally incapacity taking drugs does not break the chain.
  2. Gross Negligence Manslaughter
    1. 1. Adomako - Principles- 'The ordinary principles of the law or negligence apply to ascentain whether of not the D has been in breach of care' Lord Mackay. Duty of care owed by D to V - civil test = negligence and/or criminal ommission.
      1. 2. Breach of Duty by D: civil test - Reasonable man OR expert (training). 'Reasonable competent body exercising that skill'. Obvious risk of death - Singh/Misra/Yagoob
        3. Breach must cause death: Causation - Factual: 'But for' (White) Legal: De Minimis Principle, Intervening acts, Thin Skull rule.
        4. Negligence must be gross - Question for the jury - moves from civil to criminal liability.
        5. Mens Rea - none needed BUT subjective (recognises the risk and takes it - Lidor) and objective (reasonable man - Lichfield) suggests Gross Negligence Manslaughter
  3. General defences can be used here (Automotism, Insainity, Intoxication)

Next up

Homicide Notes

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by ems97 over 8 years ago

	Copied by Ravneet Bola over 8 years ago