Unit 3- Criminal Law

Murder
1. Actus Reus
  1. ‘Unlawful Killing'
    1. Omissions
      1. Pittwood (1902)
      2. Miller (1983)
  2. ‘Reasonable Person In Being'
  3. ‘Under The Queen’s Peace'
2. Mens Rea
  1. 'Malice Aforethought, Express or Implied'
    1. Foresight of consequences
      1. Hancock and Shankland (1986)
      2. Nedrick (1989)
    2. Vickers (1957)
3. Causation
  1. Legal Causation
    1. ‘Taking the Victim as He finds Him'
      1. Blaue (1975)
    2. New Intervening Acts
      1. Action Taken By Victim
        Roberts (1971)
      2. Jordan (1956)
      3. Malcherek and Steel (1981)
  2. Factual Causation
    1. White (1910)
    2. Pagett (1983)
Voluntary Manslaughter
1. Loss of control
  1. Defendant Must Prove a Loss of Self Control
    1. Ibrams and Gregory (1981)
    2. Baillie (1995)
    3. Ahluwalia (1992)
    4. Thornton (1996)
  2. There Must be a Qualifying Trigger
    1. Fear of serious violence
    2. Things done or said that amount to circumstances of an extremely grave character and cause the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged
    3. A combination of both triggers
    4. Clinton (2012)
  3. The Defendant must have acted like another person with an ordinary level of tolerance and self restraint would have in that circumstance
    1. camplin (1978)
    2. Holley (2005)
2. Diminished Responsibility
  1. The defendant must prove he was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognised medical condition
    1. Byrne (1960)
    2. Reynolds (1988)
    3. English (1981)
  2. The abnormality of mental functioning must substantially impair the defendants ability to do one of the following;
    1. Understand the nature of his conduct
    2. Form a rational judgement
    3. exercise self control
    4. Egan (1992)
  3. The abnormality must also provide an explanation for the defendant’s conduct, so it must cause the defendant to carry out the killing or be a significant factor
Involuntary Manslaughter
1. Gross Negligence
  1. The Defendant’s conduct can be lawful or unlawful and can be an act or omission
  2. There must be a breach of the duty of care that causes death
  3. There must be an obvious risk or death
  4. The conduct must, in the opinion of the jury, justify a criminal conviction
  5. Edwards (2001)
  6. Stone and Dobinson (1977)
2. Unlawful Act
  1. The defendant must commit an act and not an omission
  2. The unlawful act must be a criminal offence
  3. The act must be dangerous but the defendant does not need to recognise this
  4. The act must be one that causes death
  5. Lamb (1967)
  6. Dawson (1985)
  7. Corion- Auguiste
  8. Carey (2006)
Non- Fatal Offences
1. The Criminal justice Act 1988
  1. Assault
    1. Intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence
    2. Ireland; Barstow (1997)
    3. Constanza (1997)
    4. Tuberville v Savage (1669)
  2. battery
    1. Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful physical force on another
    2. Collins v Willcock (1984)
    3. DPP v K (1990)
2. The Offences Against the Person Act 1861
  1. Section 47
    1. Actus Reus
      1. Assault or Battery occasioning actual bodily harm
      2. Miller (1954)
      3. Chan Fook (1994)
    2. Mens Rea
      1. Intention or Recklessness to cause ABH
      2. Savage (1992)
      3. Roberts (1971)
  2. Section 20
    1. JCC v Eisenhower (1994)
    2. Burstow (1997)
    3. Actus Reus
      1. Unlawful Wounding or Infliction of grievous bodily harm
    4. Mens Rea
      1. 'Maliciously'
      2. Cunningham (1957)
      3. Mowatt (1976)
  3. Section 18
    1. Actus Reus
      1. Unlawful wounding or infliction of grievous bodily harm
    2. Mens Rea
      1. Specific intent
Defences
1. Insanity
  1. Defect of Reason
    1. Clarke (1972)
  2. Disease of the mind
    1. Kemp (1957)
    2. Bratty (1963)
    3. Burgess (1991)
  3. The Defendant does not know the nature and quality of his act or that what he was doing was wrong
    1. Windle (1952)
  4. M’Naghten (1843)
2. Automatism
  1. Involuntary
  2. Due to an external factor
    1. Quick (1973)
    2. Hennessy (1989)
3. Intoxication
  1. involuntary
    1. Has the intention be removed?
      1. Hardie
      2. Kingston
  2. Voluntary
    1. Specific intent crime
    2. Removed intention
      1. Lipman
4. Consent
  1. Can the offence be consented to?
    1. Normal sport activities
    2. Normal social intercourse
    3. Medical procedures, piercings, tattooing
    4. Horseplay and sexual activities
      1. Slingsby (1995)
  2. Is the consent genuine?
    1. Burrell v Harmer (1967)
    2. Tabassum (2000)
  3. Pretty (2002)
  4. Brown (1993)
5. Prevention of Crime
  1. Private Defence
    1. Preventing the commission of an offence
  2. Public Defence
    1. Defending self or property
  3. The necessity of Force
    1. Bird (1985)
  4. The Reasonableness of force
    1. Palmer (1994)

Siguiente

Descripción

Resumen del Recurso

Similar

	Creado por stasiemae hace casi 10 años