1
Q
Where does the law for murder come from?
A
Common law.
2
Q
What did Lord Coax define murder as?
A
Lord Coax defined it as an unlawful killing of a human being under the Kings peace with malice aforethought.
3
Q
How many requirements does the actus reus of murder have?
A
3
Criminal Law
flashcards
Decks in class (126)
# Cards
-
Voluntariness principle5
-
Hill v Baxter1
-
Factual causation2
-
Legal Causation3
-
Intervening acts1
-
Acts of a third party2
-
Medical negligence3
-
Acts of the victim3
-
The thin skull rule2
-
Omissions3
-
Situations where a duty to act exists1
-
Duty arising from statute2
-
Duty arising from a contractual obligation2
-
Duty arising from a special relationship2
-
Duty arising from a voluntary assumption of care3
-
Duty arising from creating a dangerous situation2
-
Duty arising from an official position2
-
Direct Intent2
-
Oblique intention2
-
Recklessness2
-
Transferred malice3
-
Evaluation of transferred malice5
-
Strict liability5
-
Public safety offences3
-
Regulatory offenses3
-
Environmental and pollution offences2
-
Reasons for strict liability1
-
Evaluation of strict liability4
-
Coincidence of the actus reus and mens rea4
-
Common assault2
-
Actus reus1
-
An act3
-
Apprehend2
-
Immediate3
-
Unlawful force3
-
Causation1
-
Tuberville v Savage1
-
Mens rea1
-
Actus reus of battery1
-
Application6
-
Unlawful force2
-
Mens Rea1
-
Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm2
-
Actual2
-
Bodily2
-
Harm3
-
Mens Rea1
-
Section 20 OAPA 18611
-
Wound2
-
GBH4
-
Inflict3
-
Causation1
-
Mens Rea4
-
Section 18 OAPA 18612
-
Murder3
-
Unlawful killing6
-
Reasonable creature in being2
-
Under the Kings peace2
-
Mens Rea5
-
Diminished responsibility2
-
Does the defendant have an abnormality of mental functioning?1
-
Is the defendants abnormality of functioning caused by a recognised medical condition?11
-
Does the defendant's abnormality of mental functioning cause a substantial impairment to the defendant's ability do 1 or more things set out in subsection 1(A).1
-
Substantial1
-
Impairments4
-
Does the defendants abnormality of mental functioning provide an explanation for the conduct?2
-
Intoxication1
-
Burden of proof1
-
Loss of control1
-
Has the defendant lost control?4
-
Was the defendants loss of control the result of a qualifying tigger?3
-
Fear trigger3
-
Anger trigger6
-
Would a person D’s sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance have acted in the same or a similar way to D6
-
Charge1
-
Establish whether D owed V a duty of care4
-
Establish whether the defendant breached the duty of care2
-
Was there a serious and obvious risk of death which is reasonably foreseeable4
-
The breach must cause the death of the victim1
-
What is the final stage of gross negligence manslagher?6
-
The defendant must have committed an unlawful act which caused the death of the victim3
-
The unlawful act must be a dangerous act4
-
The unlawful act must cause the death1
-
The defendant must have the mens rea for the unlawful act1
-
Automatism2
-
Did the defendant act involuntarily?3
-
Was the automatism caused by external factors?5
-
Self-induced3
-
Insanity1
-
The defendant must be suffering from a defect of reason3
-
The defendants defect of reasoning must be caused by a disease of the mind5
-
The defect of reason must cause the defendant to not know the nature or quality of the act or cause them not to know what they were doing was wrong6
-
Diabetes with insanity and automatism5
-
Identify the type of offence3
-
Identify the type of intoxication3
-
Apply the rule for the type of offence and intoxication3
-
Dutch Courage1
-
Intoxicated mistakes4
-
Self-defence1
-
Was the force used necessary?5
-
Was the force used proportinate?8
-
Duress by threats3
-
Was the threat to cause death or serious injury?6
-
Was the threat directed towards the defendant or his immediate family or someone close to him?2
-
Did the defendant act reasonably in the circumstances?5
-
Was the offence committed by the defendant directly caused by the threats?2
-
Did the defendant have no other choice but to carry out the offence?5
-
The defendant must not have voluntarily laid themselves open to the threats6
-
Duress of circumstances5
-
Distinguishing between defences1
-
Theft2
-
Actus Reus1
-
Appropriation7
-
Property12
-
Belonging to another3
-
Mens rea1
-
Dishonestly5
-
Intention to permanently deprive6
-
Robbery2
-
Is there the use of force or threat of force on any person?4
-
Is the force/threat of force immediately at the time of stealing and in order to do so4
-
Intention4
-
Attempts3
-
More than merely preparatory6
-
Mens Rea2
-
The impossible principle1
