murder

• Here, Carl may be liable for murder of Victoria.
• The definition of murder was by Judge Coke in the 17th century. "The unlawful killing with malice aforethought, express or implied."
• Firstly, the defendant must commit the actus reus of murder. The actus reus of murder is the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being under the Queen's peace.
• This Ar can be committed by a voluntary act or an omission. To commit the actus reus, Carl must unlawfully kill Victoria.
• The killing must be unlawful, it is not unlawful if what is done is in self-defense or in the prevention of crime (Beckford)
• For murder to be committed a 'person' must be killed, meaning the victim must have 'existence independent of the mother' having independent circulation (A-GR(N03 of 1994)(1997) and not be classed as having irreversible brain stem death (Malcherek)
• Ao2 - Carl committed the Ar through a voluntary act this is because (describe the act committed e.g. threw the knife)
• Ao2 - The actus reus is satisfied as Victoria's death is unlawful as it wasnt a lawful execution, her death occurred outside war and so was undee the Queen's peace. Carl was also not acting in self-defence as in Beckford.
• Ao2 - Victoria was reasonable person in being as she had independent existence and circulation as in Attorney General Reference (No3 of 1994(1997) She is now dead as she has suffered irreversible death of the brain - stem as in Malcherek 1981
• Ao1 - The chain of causation must create a direct link between the D;s actions and the result. Factual causation is based on the 'but for test' (but for D's actions would have V survived) this can be seen in R v White. Legal causation means that d's acts must be the 'operative and substantial' cause of harm, as in R v cheshire. Also, important the thin skull rule, D cannot reply on the deficiency in the victim to escape liability, as shown in r v Blaue, where D could not escape liability the victim refused blood transfusion due to religious reasons.
• Ao2 - Here the factual cause, d's actions are a factual cause of V's death, but for Carl throwing the knife straight into Victoria's heart she would not have died. Here Carl is the legal cause of Victoria's death as he made more than a minimal contribution to her death and there is more than a slight or trifling link between Carl's acts and Victoria's death (kimsey) as there was no novus intervenient which could break the chain of causation, cause of death was the knife hitting her heart killing her instantly
• The mens rea of murder is stated as being malice aforethought, express or implied.
• Malice aforethought means specific intention, murder cannot be committed recklessly.
• This intention may be direct or indirect.
• Direct intent is where the outcome was D's aim, purpose or desire, as seen in R v Mohan.
• Indirect intent is when it is virtually certain that a certain result will occur and D appreciates this, as seen in R v Woolin.
• The test for 'foresight of consequences' is not intention, it is only evidence of intention in which the jury may infer intention, as seen in R v Matthews and Alleyne.
• Ao1- Also important is transferred malice where the mens rea can be transferred from the intended victim to the actual victim for the same or similar crime (R v Latimer). Malice aforethought express means an intention to kill (R v Callheam) and malice aforethought implied means an intention to cause GBH. In R v Vickers D only intended to cause GBH to an old lady who caught him in her cellar but when she died was found guilty of her murder as there is no guarantee that death will not follow, when D intends serious harm.
• When Carl throws the knife he may have direct express intent. This is because Carl regards his technique as perfect there is no other explanation for his error. He had one glass of wine and was not under the influence of alcohol, not enough to lose control of his throwing and misjudge his aim. His third throw, suggest was able to throw the first two fine shows more intent to kill on his third throw.
• conclusion: Therefore, Carl is likely to be found guilty of murder and receive a mandatory life sentence