Download Murder and Manslaughter Case Guide and more Study notes Criminal Law in PDF only on Docsity!
Point Detail Authority
MURDER
Murder is the coincidence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea
R v Church
Definition of Murder The unlawful killing of a human being resulting in death under the queens peace with malice aforethought expressed by the party or implied by law
Lord Coke
Mens Rea malice aforethought expressed by the party or implied by law
R v Maloney
Two types of intention Direct and Oblique
Direct intent A decision to bring about a particular consequence no matter whether the accused desired that consequence or not
R v Mohan
Oblique intent The defendant foresaw that his actions would be virtually certain to cause death
R v Woolin
There are two types of
manslaughter
Voluntary and Involuntary
Involuntary
Manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter In the absence of a Mens rea, one must look to involuntary manslaughter
There are two types involuntary manslaughter
Constructive manslaughter (sometimes known as unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter) and Gross Negligence Manslaughter (GNM)
Point Detail Authority
Constructive
Manslaughter
There are 3 Rules to constructive manslaughter
As confirmed by the House of Lords
Newbury
- Establish there was an unlawful act
Must be a criminal offence with the attached Mens rea
R v Franklin
Must be an act not an omission R v Lamb
The act does not need to be directed at the victim
R v Mitchell
Neither does it need to be directed at a person
(ie could be directed at property or a building)
R v Goodfellow
- The act must be a dangerous one
“the unlawful act must be such as all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise must subject the other person to at least the risk of some harm”
R v Church
Causation
- It must be shown that D caused V’s death
Two types of causation; factual and legal
Factual causation ‘but for’ test R v White
Legal causation D must be the operative and substantive cause of death. Does not need to be the sole cause but must be more than minimal
R v Smith
Point Detail Authority
The must be no Novus Actus Interveniens
a. Act of a third party
b. Victims own act
c. Medical Intervention
a. Pagett
b. Bi) R v Roberts
Bii) R v Williams
c. R v Jordan
probability
- D must have lost control This is a subjective test Sec 54(1)(a)
Does not have to be a sudden loss of control
Sec 54(2)
Case of Ahluwalia
And must not be an act of revenge Sec 54(4)
R v Ibrahms
- There must have been a trigger
There are two; fear of serious violence or things said and done
Sec 54(1)(b)
Fear of serious violence To oneself or another Sec 55(3)
Things said or done Of an extremely grave character giving D a justifiable sense of being wronged
Sec 55(4)
Things said or done must be looked at objectively
R v Dawes
A combination would also qualify Sec 55(5)
There are however some disqualifying triggers
Inciting a fear of serious violence to provide an excuse for using violence
Sec 55(6)(a)
Point Detail Authority
Inciting a sense of being seriously wronged by things said or done to provide an excuse for using violence
Sec 55(6)(b)
The fact the things said or done amount to sexual infidelity, this is to be disregarded
No statutory definition of sexual infidelity
Sec 55(6)(c)
- A person of D’s sex and age with a normal degree of
Sec 54(1)(c)
tolerance and restraint and in the circumstances of D would have react in the same or a similar way
Camplin
Diminished
responsibility
Established Converts a murder conviction into one of manslaughter on the civil standard of proof, balance of probability
Sec 2 Homicide Act 1957 and amended by Sec 52 Coroners and Justice Act 2009
- abnormality of mental functioning…
‘a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that reasonable person would term it abnormal’
Sec 2(1)(a)
R v Byrne
… arising from a recognised medical condition
Could be recognisable by a doctor or in the WHO International Classification of Diseases
- Substantially impairs ability to do one or more of the following… - Understand the nature of their conduct - Form a rational judgement - Exercise self-control
Sec 2(1)(b)
- (^) Provides an explanation for D’s conduct
