• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Vincent stabs Kay, she survives long enough to give birth to the infant, but dies a few weeks later. The baby survives for 140 days, and then also dies.a) Explain the offence with which Vincent may be charged in respect of the death of Kay

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Paper 2, November 1998, Question 6 Trina Soon Vincent and Kay live together. Kay becomes pregnant by another man, and Vincent cannot come to terms with this. The relationship becomes more and more strained until eventually, when Kay is 28 weeks pregnant, they have a violent argument and Vincent stabs Kay in the abdomen. She survives long enough to give birth to the infant, but dies a few weeks later. The baby survives for 140 days, and then also dies. a) Explain the offence with which Vincent may be charged in respect of the death of Kay (15) b) Explain the offence with which Vincent may be charged in respect of the death of the baby. (10) a. In relation to the death of Kay, there is the possibility that Vincent would be charged under homicide. Vincent has the pertinent actus reus of homicide, whereby he has committed an unlawful killing in the Queen's peace in the county of the realm and death occurs within 1 year and 1 day. ...read more.

Middle

It was held that intent couldn't be inferred unless the defendant appreciated that the consequence was a virtual certainty. As such, Vincent knew the consequences of his actions, and still had an intention to harm. Thus, he has the apt actus reus and mens rea, and can be charged for homicide. However, Vincent's charge for murder may be reduced to voluntary manslaughter, if he can prove any of the mitigating factors, namely diminished responsibility and provocation. According to Section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957, diminished responsibility is defined as an abnormal state of mind (at the time of murder) that does not constitute insanity. In R v. Byrne, it was held that diminished responsibility may be caused by disease, injury, mental sub normality, and covers conditions like depression, irresistible impulse and other inherent factors. The law on provocation is under Section 3 Homicide Act 1957. For the defense of provocation to succeed, there must have been some act(s) or word(s) of provocation, so that the defendant loses control. ...read more.

Conclusion

By stabbing Kay in the abdomen would unquestionably cause harm to both her and the baby. In R v. Woollin, the defendant killed his child by throwing him onto a hard surface, and it was held that intention can be found when the defendant foresaw the consequence as a virtually certain result of conduct. As such, Vincent's intention to harm is evident. However, it is not known if Vincent's rage was directed at Kay or at the baby. If it was directed at Kay, transferred malice is applicable here, as the actus reus is of the same type. Vincent's act and intention to harm Kay, is the same as the act to harm the baby, contrary to R v. Pembilton where the act is not the same. In R v. Latimer, the defendant used a belt to strike a man, but injured a woman next to him. It was held that if the defendant had the mens rea of a crime and causes the actus reus of that crime against another person, the original mens rea is transferred to the actual actus reus. As such, any intention Vincent had to harm Kay, can be transferred to the baby. 2 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    that there is a relationship of proximity and that it is reasonable to impose a duty in this area. In the case of Woolridge v Sumner 1963 2 QB 43 'the duty of care which a competitor or participant in a sports game owes to a spectator depends on the

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Homicide Act 1957

    3 star(s)

    A problem occurs in cases of murder arising out of domestic violence where in the majority of cases a woman has suffered provocation, over the years from a partner and then kills that partner as a result of a final act of provocation.

  1. Involuntary manslaughter comprises the commission of the actus reus of homicide without malice aforethought, ...

    The other main type of involuntary manslaughter is gross negligence manslaughter. This is manslaughter caused by such disregard for life and safety of others (beyond mere tortious negligence) that it warrants punishment by the criminal law. This is also, where a defendant owes the victim a duty of care and

  2. Cases on provocation

    in considering whether an ordinary man would have acted in such a way. The House of Lords agreed, and rejected the reasoning of the majority in Luc. Under the 1957 Act, provocation is expressly a matter for the jury and the judge must not tell them to ignore anything they might consider relevant.

  1. The terms Actus Reus and Mens Rea

    towards risk can form the necessary mens rea and complete the offence. Another important part of the case law on coincidence is the Attorney General's reference No.4 of 19806. This ruling in this case is that if there are multiple acts, one of which caused the death of the victim,

  2. Any crime in law is made up of two elements, the actus reus which ...

    For there to be gross negligence there must be a duty of care and a serious breach of that duty which is beyond a matter of mere compensation which has possibly lead to serious damage or even the death of someone.

  1. Discussing Homicide - muder - actus reus.

    Well, the House of Lords decided that in these circumstances, an intention to inflict grievous bodily harm on the mother cannot amount to murder of the child, although it could amount to manslaughter. It may however still be the case that there could be liability for the murder of the

  2. Jenny had an argument with her boyfriend, David, which resulted in David throwing Jenny ...

    Similarly the courts are reluctant to convict a person if he has only the mens rea of an offence and does not commit the actus reus at the same time. However in cases such as Thabo Meli v R and Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner the courts are prepared to

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work