Term 1 Flashcards Preview

Criminal Law > Term 1 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Term 1 Deck (32)
Loading flashcards...
0
Q

Factual causation is determined using a “but for” test

A

R v White
The son tried to poison his mother but she died of a heart attack before the poison worked, she would have died “but for” the poisoning

1
Q

The actus reus is refusing to move the car off of the policeman’s foot

A

Fagan v Metropolitan Police

2
Q

There is legal causation when the defendant “contributed significantly to the result”

A

R v Pagett

The defendant used his pregnant girlfriend while shooting at the police, the police shot her dead

3
Q

Stabbing was not the actual cause of death so not murder

A

R v Jordan

The victim had an allergic reaction to an injection administered by the hospital

4
Q

The negligence of the hospital caused the death but the defendant remained guilty

A

R v Cheshire

The hospital failed to administer a tracheotomy, but it was the initial wound that killed him

5
Q

The thin skull rule

A

R v Blaue

The victim refused a blood transfusion due to religious beliefs

6
Q

A defendant can be liable for an omission when they have a contractual duty to act

A

R v Pitwood

7
Q

Assuming a duty of care can make you guilty of an omission

A

R v Stone and Dobinson

The defendants allowed Stone’s sister to die after they said they would look after her

8
Q

Parents have a duty of care to act

A

R v Gibbons and Procter

9
Q

The normal meaning of intention should be used (all acts beside homicide)

A

R v Mohan
“A decision to bring about… The commission of an offence, no matter whether the defendant desired the consequences or not”

10
Q

There must be a virtual certainty of death or serious bodily harm that the defendant foresaw for a charge of murder

A

R v Woolin

The defendant threw his baby into a wall

11
Q

The mens rea is realising that there is a risk that they may cause the actus reus (all unlawful acts beside homicide)

A

R v Cunningham

12
Q

Interpretation of the Criminal Damage Act 1971to define the mens rea of criminal damage

A

R v R and G

1) a circumstance where he is aware of a risk that exists or will exist
2) a result when he is aware of a risk that will occur

13
Q

The same mens rea is transferable malice

A

R v Latimer

14
Q

Different mens rea is not transferable malice

A

R v Pembilton

The defendant intended to hit a person with a stone but smashed a window

15
Q

Lord Steyn suggests that the Woolin rule should be overruled to mean intention to kill or intention to commit GBH with awareness that it may kill

A

R v Powell

16
Q

Loss of control:

The courts cannot expect an “old head on young shoulders”

A

R v Camplin

17
Q

Loss of control must consider whether the degree of violence was reasonable

A

R v Dongen

18
Q

It is unclear how battered women cases will be solved under the new law

A

R v Ahluwalia

19
Q

A mere difference if mind is not sufficient for the defence of dismissed responsibility

A

R v Byrne

20
Q

Lord Lewton found this decision unfair

A

R v Vinagre
D used the old defence of diminished responsibility claiming his “othello syndrome” made him unnaturally jealous so was justified in killing his cheating wife
This would be decided differently under the new law

21
Q

The courts may decide what substantially means

A

R v R

22
Q

Alcohol dependency must be judged on the characteristics of the case

A

R v Stewart

23
Q

Must be an act not merely an omission for unlawful act manslaughter to apply

A

R v Lowe

24
Q

Simple lack of care is not enough for a conviction of unlawful act manslaughter

A

Andrews v DPP

Killed a pedestrian while speeding and overtaking another car

25
Q

An unlawful act manslaughter must amount from a dangerous act

A

R v Church

26
Q

Foreseeing death is not necessary for constructive manslaughter

A

DPP v Newbury

27
Q

A reasonable person would not know the characteristics of the defendant

A

R v Dawson

Unlawful act manslaughter did not apply as they were not aware of the victim’s heart condition

28
Q

Judged by the sober and reasonable man

A

R v Ball

29
Q

Unlawful act manslaughter is analysed purely on causation

A

AG Ref No. 3 of 1994

This overruled Dalby where the act had to happen directly to the victim

30
Q

For gross negligence manslaughter to apply death must have been foreseen by the reasonable man

A

R v Singh (Gurpal)

31
Q

Consent cannot be a defence to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861

A

R v Brown