Actus Reus P2

?
  • Created by: hroper
  • Created on: 15-05-18 09:42
R v Pagett (1983) (Factual cause)
D fired at the police whilst using his gf as a shield and the police returned fire and killed the girl. The D was convicted of manslaughter as the girl would not have died "but for" him using her as a shield in the shoot-out.
1 of 19
White (1910) (Factual cause)
D put cyanide in his mother's drink however she died of a heart attack before drinking it meaning that D was not the factual cause of her death and was not guilty of murder. He was however guilty of attempted murder.
2 of 19
R v Hughes (2013)(Factual Cause)
The SC held that factual causation is not necessarily enough on its own for liability.
3 of 19
R v Hughes (2013) key facts in the case
D was driving his campervan. As he rounded a bend a car came towards him swerving into D's side of the road . The car smashed into D's camper van and tipped it over. The other driver, who was under the influence of heroin, died as a result.
4 of 19
R v Kimsey (1996) (Legal cause)
The Court of Appeal held that instead of using "de minimis" it was acceptable to tell the jury it must be "more than a slight or trifling link"
5 of 19
R v Kimsey (1996) key facts in the case
D was involved in a high-speed car chase with a friend. She before ost control of her car and the other driver was killed in the crash. The evidence about what happened before D lost control was unclear.
6 of 19
R v Blaue (1975) (thin skull rule)
A young woman was stabbed by the defendant and needed a blood transfusion but refused due to being a Jehovah's Witness and died. D was convicted of her manslaughter as he has take to take his V as he found her.
7 of 19
R v Smith (1959) (medical treatment) point of law
It was held that the D would be guilty, provided that the injury caused by D was still an 'operating' and 'substantial' cause of death. The stab wound to the lung was still 'operating' and it was substantial cause of V's death.
8 of 19
R v Smith (1959) (medical treatment) key case facts
Two soldiers had a fight and one was stabbed in the lung. V was carried to the medical centre, but was dropped on the way. At the medical centre staff gave him artificial respiration by pressing on his chest. This made the injury worse and he died.
9 of 19
R v Cheshire (1991) ( medical treatment) key case facts
D shot V in the thigh and stomach. V needed major surgery. He developed breathing problems and was given a tracheotomy. Two months afterwards the V died from a rare complicated left by the tracheotomy which was not spotted by the doctors
10 of 19
R v Chesire (1991) point of law
By the time V died, the original wounds had virtually healed and were no longer life-threatening. D was still held liable for V's death as the prosecution only had to prove that D's acts contributed to the death and did not need to be the sole cause.
11 of 19
R v Jordan (1956) (medical treatment) key case facts
V was stabbed in the stomach, treated in hospital and the wounds were healing well. He was given an antibiotic but suffered an allergic reaction to it. One doctor stopped it, but the next day another doctor ordered a large dose of it to be given.
12 of 19
R v Jordan (1956) (medical treatment) point of law
D was not guilty of murder as the actions of the doctor were held to be an intervening act which caused the death.
13 of 19
R v Malcherek (1981) Life support machines
D stabbed his wife and she was put on a life support machine. A number of tests showed she was brain dead and the machine was switched off. D was charged with murder as the judge refused to allow the issue of causation to go to the jury.
14 of 19
R v Roberts (1972) (Victim's own act) key case facts
A girl jumped from a car travelling between 20mph-40mph, to escape Robert's sexual advances. D was liable for her injuries and the Court of Appeal upheld D's conviction for assault occasioning ABH under s47 of OAPA 1861.
15 of 19
R v Roberts (1972) (Victim's own act) point of law
The Court of Appeal held that the test to be applied is 'was V's reaction that natural result of what D said and did in the sense that it was something that could be reasonably have been foreseen as the consequence of what D was saying or doing'
16 of 19
R v Marjoram (2000) (Victim's own act)
The V fell/jumped from a window as a result of people shouting abuse and suffered serious injuries. The conviction of GBH was upheld as it was reasonably foreseeable that V would fear the group and escape via the window
17 of 19
R v Williams & Davis (1992) (Victim's own act)
A hitchhiker jumped from the D's window at 30mph and died due to the D trying to steal V's wallet. The Court of Appeal said that V's actions had broken the chain of causation due to taking drastic action when the threat was minor.
18 of 19
R v Dear (1996) (Victim refusing treatment)
The V was slashed by the D with a knife but did not have the wounds attended to and opened them further resulting in death. The D was guilty of murder as the court held that provided the wounds were an operating and significant case then he is guilt
19 of 19

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

White (1910) (Factual cause)

Back

D put cyanide in his mother's drink however she died of a heart attack before drinking it meaning that D was not the factual cause of her death and was not guilty of murder. He was however guilty of attempted murder.

Card 3

Front

R v Hughes (2013)(Factual Cause)

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

R v Hughes (2013) key facts in the case

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

R v Kimsey (1996) (Legal cause)

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

Murder
See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »