1. Hyam v DPP
Brady
-D poured petrol in her rival's letterbox to
make her leave
-D claimed she thought the house was
empty, but there were children there who
died
-D was convicted as the person has the
mens rea for murder when he does the act
that kills, he knows that it is highly probable
it will cause death/GBH
-Confirmed the definition of intention:
1. D did an act where he desired to
produce the particular result
2. aware that it was likely produce that
result
2. Steane
- D made broadcasts for enemy in
WW2 under duress
-convicted of intending to assist
enemy
-conviction quashed as the jury
should be allowed to determine the
true intent in each case
3. R v Moloney
- D and his stepfather drank heavily
-S told D he did not guts to pull trigger
- D pulled trigger, killed S
-D was convicted of murder
-overruled Hyam v Dpp
-the judge should avoid any elaboration
on what is meant by intent and leave it
to the jury's good sense to decide
whether the accused acted with the
necessary intent
-foresight of virtual certainty is not equal
to intention, it is rather a state of mind
that may be used to infer intention
4. Hancock v Shankland
- H and S objected to W
going to work as they were
on a strike
-threw a block of concrete
from a bridge, killed W
-Claimed they only intended
to block road.
- held liable as greater
probability > consequence
was foreseen > it was
intended
-jury will decide based on all
evidence
5. R v Nedrick
-N threatened to burn out
woman he had a grudge
against
-put paraffin in her letterbox,
her child died
-Convicted of murder
-jury are not entitled to infer
intention until they feel that
death/GBH was a virtual
certainity and D appreciated
this
-from this^ it will be easier to
infer that D intended to kill/ do
serious harm
6. R v Woollin
-W threw his 3 month old son
on a hard object, killing him
- Convicted, as he
realized there was a risk of
serious injury
-foresight is not intention, it is
only evidence from which jury
can infer intention
-foresight of anything less
than virtual certainity cannot
be intention rather
recklessness
Mens Rea
7. Stringer
- M started fire in his
house, walked away,
killing his family
-was convicted as it was
virtually certain that
somebody in the house
would suffer serious harm
- it is 'obvious' to any
ordinary person.
1. Virtually certain?
2. Did D see it as being
Virtually certain?
8. Cunningham
- D ripped a gas meter from the
wall in order to steal from it
-gas escaped pipes harming
occupants
-recklessness meant accused
has foreseen that the particular
kind of harm might be done yet
has gone to take the risk
Intention > virtually certain
Recklessness > high degree of
probability
9. Parker
- D frustrated with a public telephone,
smashed it, therefore damaged it.
- A person was reckless not only when
he was conscious of the risk but also if
he closed his mind off to the obvious
fact that there is some risk of damage
resulting from the act
10. R v Stephenson
- Defendant tried to go to sleep in a
haystack, to keep himself warm started
fire, damaged a lot...he had a history of
schizophrenia
- D's medical condition would render
him less able than ordinary people to
foresee the consequences of his
actions
11.
-D was drunk, climbed on
railings at a nightclub, fell on
dance floor
-caused injuries to V
-No defence for a person with
self induced intoxication
12. Caldwell
- D had a grievance against
hotel owner
-got very drunk, fought, set fire
to the hotel
-No longer was it necessary to
prove that D foresaw the risk of
harm, it was enough that they
should have foreseen it
13. Lawrence
-jury may apply the 'standard of
the ordinary prudent motorist as
represented by themselves'
14. Elliot v C
- a 14 year old girl with learning
difficulties lit shed on fire
- D was guilty as it did not matter
whether she foresaw the risk
rather if a reasonable person
would have foreseen the risk
^ this was seen as unjust as due
to her learning difficulties she was
incapable of appreciating the risk
15. R v G and other
-G + R went camping without
their parents permission
-set fire, it spread, loss of 1m
-neither appreciated the risk
-one has to be aware of the risk
to be blamed for it
-an obvious risk to adults would
not necessarily be obvious to
children
-objective > subjective