Coincidence Rule and Transferred Malice

• Coincidence Rule: It must be shown that the D possessed the MR at the same time the AR was committed.
• Fagan v MPC: Demonstrates the coincidence rule
• For the coincidence rule to take place:

  1. The events take place over a period of time
  2. There is a chain of events
• R v Church: Chain of events
• Transferred malice is that the D will be liable for an offence if he has the necessary mens rea and commits the actus reus even if the V differs from the intended victim.
• The mens rea must satisfy the new offence.
• Latimer: There is no requirement that the mens rea should relate to a named victim.
• Mitchell: Transfers through the intended victim to the actual victim.