Murder

Includes omissions causation and general AS principles such as transferred malice, coincidence of actus reus and mens rea ect. 

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: evie_995
  • Created on: 16-01-14 21:53

1. What do you need to prove Legal Causation?

  • The consequence would not have happened 'but for' the defendant's conduct.
  • The defendant did not intentionally cause the end result.
  • The defendant's conduct was more than a 'minimal' cause of the consequence.
1 of 19

Other questions in this quiz

2. What does the case of Woollin tell us?

  • The end result must be a virtual certainty of the defendant's actions, and the defendant must foresee this for their to be oblique intention.
  • The defendant must appreciate that the end result was a possibility.
  • There is oblique intention when the defendant takes an unjustified risk.

3. Which case is an example of when the chain of causation was broken?

  • Jordan (1956)
  • Smith (1959)
  • Cheshire (1991)

4. When is the chain of causation broken?

  • When the defendant fails to act.
  • When the act is so independent of the defendant's conduct and sufficiently serious enough.
  • When the defendant did not have intention to cause the end result

5. When is an omission sufficient for the actus reus?

  • When you feel morally obliged to.
  • When there is a duty to act.
  • When someone is in danger.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »