Murder

Question 1

Section 9 OAPA or S3 British Nationality Act

Answer 1

A murder or manslaughter committed by a british citizen on land anywhere out of the uK may be tried in England as if it had been committed there.

Question 2

Who can be the victim of murder

Answer 2

A reasonable create in Rerum natura This is any human being

Question 3

Is it murder to kill a foetus/child in the womb? Or in the process of leaving the womb?

Answer 3

If the child has ‘an existence independent of its mother’ it is capable of being murdered. Therefore

Question 4

Poulton

Answer 4

The child must have been wholly expelled from the mother’s body and be alive

Question 5

When is the baby alive?

Answer 5

When it has an independed existence and it has breathed. But there is some uncertainty at the precise moment the child is protected

Question 6

A-G’s reference (No3 of 1994)

Answer 6

D stabbed girlfriend, V who was 26 weeks pregnant causing X to be born prematurely and die 120 days later. HOL accepted obiter that as an established rule, violence towards a foetus which results in harm suffered after the baby is born can give rise to criminal liability.

Question 7

Mens rea problem with foetus murder

Answer 7

COA held that the foetus is an intergral part of the mother, if there was an intention to kill or cause serious harm to the mother, this intention would also be towards the child. HOL disagreed and said that “the mother and foetus were two distinct organisms”. They declined to extend the doctrine of transferred malice to double transfer of intent. However, the HOL then went on to say that it is manslaughter to kill baby not murder.

Question 8

CP (A child) v First tier Tribunal

Answer 8

A child was born with alcohol syndrome after her mother drank during pregnancy. Lord Dyson held: “it is well established that a foetus is not a “person” rather it is a sui generis organism” and that A-G reference supported this position.

Question 9

Death and murder

Answer 9

At the moment there is ambiguity as to when someone is death. The law has not evolved a definition but the current medical view is when someone is brain dead.

Question 10

Dyson

Answer 10

There must be some acceleration of death

Question 11

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

Answer 11

There is a special defence for doctors. Where a doctor is caring for a patient lawfully administers painkilling drugs, despite the fact he knows the incidental effect will be death this is a defence.

Question 12

Lord Sumption in the case of Nicklinson

Answer 12

Medical treatment intended to relieve pain is not unlawful only because it has incidental consequences, however foreseeable.

Question 13

R v Winchester Crown Court

Answer 13

Doctor acting in good faith purposefully killed in order to terminate pain. Held: guilty.

Question 14

Inglis

Answer 14

COA confirmed that there is no defence of mercy killing in english law.

Question 15

The mens rea of murder

Answer 15

Malice aforethought

Question 16

Malice aforethought

Answer 16

HOL has confirmed that this means intention in Moloney. Manslaughter is an unlawful homicide without malice aforethought. It is: 1) an intention to kill any person or: 2) An intention to cause GBH.

Question 17

What does GBH mean?

Answer 17

Grievous means “really serious”. In Saunders it was held that it is for the judge to decide in each case whether it is necessary to direct the jury that the harm intended must be”really serious”.

Question 18

DPP v Smith

Answer 18

HOL laid down an objective test for liability of murder. The test was “not what the defendant contemplated but what the ordinary reasonable man in the circumstances have contemplated as the natural and probably result.

Question 19

Murder section

Answer 19

S1/2 Homicide act 1957

Question 20

A murder or manslaughter committed by a british citizen on land anywhere out of the uK may be tried in England as if it had been committed there.

Answer 20

Section 9 OAPA or S3 British Nationality Act

Question 21

A reasonable create in Rerum natura This is any human being

Answer 21

Who can be the victim of murder

Question 22

If the child has ‘an existence independent of its mother’ it is capable of being murdered. Therefore

Answer 22

Is it murder to kill a foetus/child in the womb? Or in the process of leaving the womb?

Question 23

The child must have been wholly expelled from the mother’s body and be alive

Answer 23

Poulton

Question 24

When it has an independed existence and it has breathed. But there is some uncertainty at the precise moment the child is protected

Answer 24

When is the baby alive?

Question 25

D stabbed girlfriend, V who was 26 weeks pregnant causing X to be born prematurely and die 120 days later. HOL accepted obiter that as an established rule, violence towards a foetus which results in harm suffered after the baby is born can give rise to criminal liability.

Answer 25

A-G’s reference (No3 of 1994)

Question 26

COA held that the foetus is an intergral part of the mother, if there was an intention to kill or cause serious harm to the mother, this intention would also be towards the child. HOL disagreed and said that “the mother and foetus were two distinct organisms”. They declined to extend the doctrine of transferred malice to double transfer of intent. However, the HOL then went on to say that it is manslaughter to kill baby not murder.

Answer 26

Mens rea problem with foetus murder

Question 27

A child was born with alcohol syndrome after her mother drank during pregnancy. Lord Dyson held: “it is well established that a foetus is not a “person” rather it is a sui generis organism” and that A-G reference supported this position.

Answer 27

CP (A child) v First tier Tribunal

Question 28

At the moment there is ambiguity as to when someone is death. The law has not evolved a definition but the current medical view is when someone is brain dead.

Answer 28

Death and murder

Question 29

There must be some acceleration of death

Answer 29

Dyson

Question 30

There is a special defence for doctors. Where a doctor is caring for a patient lawfully administers painkilling drugs, despite the fact he knows the incidental effect will be death this is a defence.

Answer 30

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

Question 31

Medical treatment intended to relieve pain is not unlawful only because it has incidental consequences, however foreseeable.

Answer 31

Lord Sumption in the case of Nicklinson

Question 32

Doctor acting in good faith purposefully killed in order to terminate pain. Held: guilty.

Answer 32

R v Winchester Crown Court

Question 33

COA confirmed that there is no defence of mercy killing in english law.

Answer 33

Inglis

Question 34

Malice aforethought

Answer 34

The mens rea of murder

Question 35

HOL has confirmed that this means intention in Moloney. Manslaughter is an unlawful homicide without malice aforethought. It is: 1) an intention to kill any person or: 2) An intention to cause GBH.

Answer 35

Malice aforethought

Question 36

Grievous means “really serious”. In Saunders it was held that it is for the judge to decide in each case whether it is necessary to direct the jury that the harm intended must be”really serious”.

Answer 36

What does GBH mean?

Question 37

HOL laid down an objective test for liability of murder. The test was “not what the defendant contemplated but what the ordinary reasonable man in the circumstances have contemplated as the natural and probably result.

Answer 37

DPP v Smith

Question 38

S1/2 Homicide act 1957

Answer 38

Murder section