Murder

Includes omissions causation and general AS principles such as transferred malice, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea ect. 

?
  • Created by: evie_995
  • Created on: 16-01-14 21:53
The definition of murder is:
The unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being with malice aforethought, express or implied
1 of 17
Name a case where there is a duty because of a relationship.
Gibbins and Proctor (1918)
2 of 17
When is an omission sufficient for the actus reus?
When there is a duty to act.
3 of 17
What does the case of Attorney-General's Reference ( No 3 of 1994) (1997) show?
The child has to have an existence independent of the mother for it to be considered 'a reasonable creature in being'
4 of 17
Which case shows factual causation?
White (1910)
5 of 17
What do you need to prove Legal Causation?
The consequence would not have happened 'but for' the defendant's conduct.
6 of 17
Which case shows the 'thin-skull rule'?
Blaue (1975)
7 of 17
When is the chain of causation broken?
When the act is so independent of the defendant's conduct and sufficiently serious enough.
8 of 17
When does medical treatment break the chain of causation?
When medical treatment is palpably wrong.
9 of 17
When does the Victim's own act break the chain of causation?
When the victim acts in an unreasonable way.
10 of 17
Give an example of a case when the victim reacted in an unreasonable way and broke the chain of causation.
Williams (1992)
11 of 17
What must you prove for the mens rea of murder
Intention to kill or intention to cause grievous bodily harm
12 of 17
What is oblique intent?
When the defendant's main aim was not the death of the victim, but something quite different, however in achieving the aim, death or serious injury is caused.
13 of 17
What does the case of Woollin tell us?
The end result must be a virtual certainty of the defendant's actions, and the defendant must foresee this for their to be oblique intention.
14 of 17
Name a case of oblique intention.
Matthews and Alleyne (2003)
15 of 17
Name the case of transferred malice.
Mitchell (1983)
16 of 17
Name a case for coincidence of actus reus and mens rea.
Thabo Meli v R
17 of 17

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Name a case where there is a duty because of a relationship.

Back

Gibbins and Proctor (1918)

Card 3

Front

When is an omission sufficient for the actus reus?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

What does the case of Attorney-General's Reference ( No 3 of 1994) (1997) show?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Which case shows factual causation?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »