Homicide

I. Murder

1. Classic definition: Murder compromises the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature who is in being and under the (Queen's) peace, with malice aforethougt ... the death following within a year and a day.

2. In particular:
a) 'Reasonable creature' = human being, as opposed to an animal.
b) 'In being' = born. However, after 28 weeks of pregnancy, the prevention of the kid being born alive is more than mere abortion, but 'child destruction', according to the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929.
c) 'Under the Queen's Peace' = there is no murder when an enemy is killed in war.
d) 'Malice aforethought' = the element of intent, whether general of particular. Also: intent to cause grievous bodily harm.
However, no ill-will need be involved, nor need the act be premeditated; intention is all that is required.
e) 'The death following within a year and a day'. This rule was abolished by the Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996.


II. Manslaughter

1. Voluntary Manslaughter
a) Acts done under provocation:
The defenant is to be treated as a 'reasonable man' placed in the relevant circumstances. The reasonable man will not be over-irritable, quick to wrath, or unduly pugnacious, but such thing as his age or his colour may reasonably affect his reactions.
b) Act done in pursuance of a suicide pact:
The accused must have acted in pursuance of the pact; he must have had a 'settled intention of dying'.
c) Diminished responsibility:
This can be invoked when the defendant is on the borderline of insanity.
d) Self-defense with force greater than necessary: This does not necessarily lead to manslaughter.

2. Involuntary Manslaugher
a) Commission of an unlawful and dangerous act:
Here, what is intended is the commission of the dangerous act. However, the defendant need not have himself considered the act 'dangerous'.
b) Gross negligence:
There must be conduct by the accused involving risk of death and the conduct must have fallen far below the standard to be expected of a reasonable person.
R. v. ADOMAKO (1994)
c) Subjective Recklessness:
Here, the conduct of the defendant was such as to create an obvious and serious risk of unlawful physical injury to another, and either he has not given any thought to the possibility of there being any such risk, or, having recognized that there was some risk involved, has none the less gone on to take it.
d) Killing during intoxication:
Where someone is so intoxicated as to be unaware of doing the act which causes the death he may be charged with manslaughter, for there is no malice aforethought.


III. Aiding and abetting suicide

1. Since the passing of the Suicide Act 1961 suicide of itself is no longer a crime.

2. However, it is a crime to aid, abet, counsel or procure the suicide of another. But it must be the aiding etc. of a specific persons or group of people known to the person acting.


IV. Infanticide
This is designed to help mothers who kill their kids being under the age of 12 months.


V. Causation
Where there is an intervening act constituting an independent cause so that the initial (the defendant's) act does not remain operative.
R. v. JORDAN (1956)
R. v. MALCHEREK (1981)