Actus reus of murder

• what are the four things that must be proven to see if the D has the actrus reus of murder>

  The defendant did in fact kill the victim

  The victim was a reasonable creature in being

  The killing was unlawful

  The Killing was done under the Monarch's peace
• In the context of murder, what is the significance of the case of R v Gibbins and Proctor?

  It shows that the actus reus of murder can be done by an omission.
• Describe very briefly the facts of the case of r v Gibbins and Proctor

  The defendants were parents of the victim, they failed to feed their seven year old daughter, who died as a result of their omission.
• The actus reus of killing can be by an act or omission, but it must cause the death of the victim.
• The defendant cannot be guilty of murder unless their act or omission caused the death.
• What is the significance of the case of R v white?

  It is an example of the but/for test failing in the context of murder, as it wasn't the defendant's fault that the victim died.
• Describe, very briefly, the facts of r v White?

  The defendant put potassium cyanide in his mother's tea, however, she died of a heart attack and left the tea untouched. While the defendant was not guilty of murder, he was guilty of attempted murder.
• what is the significance of the case of r v cheshire?

  It is a case that illustrates the legal causation test, meaning that it shows that the D must make a significant contribution to V’s injury – he need not be the sole cause, the D's actions must be the operating and substantial cause of the injury.
• what is the significance of the case of r v jordan?

  It shows how Negligent, poor & inappropriate treatment can break the chain of causation
• What is the significance of the case of r v Blaue

  it shows how the victim can break the chain if medical treatment is unreasonably refused
• What is the significance of the case of r v roberts?

  It shows how the victim can break the chain if he acts unreasonably & ~unforeseeably
• what is meant by the fact that a victim of murder must be a reasonable creature in being?

  This phrase means a human being, so for murder a person must be killed
• what is the ratio decidendi of Attorney General's reference number 3 of 1994-1997?

  A foetus does not count as a human being, and cannot be killed.
• what case has the ratio decided that 'a foetus does not count as a human being and cannot be killed'?

  Attorney General's third reference of 1994 - 1997
• It is not certain whether a 'brain - dead' person would be considered as a reasonable creature in being or not. However, doctors are allowed to turn off life support machines without being liable for murder or manslaughter.
• The Law Reform (Year and One Day Rule) Act 1996 sets no time limit on when the death of a victim can occur after the unlawful act, although where it is more than three years after the attack, the Attorney General's consent is needed for prosecution.
• Under the monarch's peace means that killing an enemy in the course of war is not murder; however, killing a prisoner of war would be sufficient for the actus reus of murder
• Killing will not be unlawful if it is:

  • In self defence
  • in defence of another
  • in prevention of a crime and the defendant used reasonable force in the circumstances