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

In relation to the offence of murder discuss the suggestion that the law is in urgent need of reform

Extracts from this document...


In relation to the offence of murder discuss the suggestion that the law is in urgent need of reform The definition of murder is derived from the explanation by Sir Edward Coke who expressed "Murder is when a (person)...unlawfully killeth..any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the Queen's peace, with malice aforethought.." - this is essentially; the unlawful killing of a human being. However, the conundrum this provides is the actus reus of murder; in that there is no distinction of the severity or gravity of the crime. This definition raises several points that require further consideration, as there are many anomalies and thought concepts that are now out dated. Coke's definition of murder used to provide that the death of the victim had to occur within a year and a day of the actus reus; so when this definition was originated the "year and a day rule" was sufficient, however with modern technology life may be maintained for longer, so already this anomaly has been reformed under the Law Reform Act (Year and a Day Rule) 1996 as the time frame was no longer relevant. ...read more.


Therefore if someone breaks another person's arm and that person subsequently dies then the aggressor is guilty of murder even if they did not want that person to die. As Lord Edmund-Davies commented in R v Cunningham (1982) AC566, 'I find it passing strange that a person can be convicted of murder if death results from, say, his intentional breaking of another's arm, an action, which, while calling for severe punishment, would in most cases be unlikely to kill.' This does raise the question of principle. However, if the intention is there, then the malice is there, providing conditional intent. 'The jury may find evidence of intent that D perceives his act will virtually certainly lead to really serious harm'. Juries are often unwilling to convict on this and will give the benefit of the doubt. Within the law there are three ways to qualify for murder. Firstly, murder requires intention, and nothing less will suffice -R v Moloney (1985) 1 AC 905. Secondly, section 8 Criminal Justice Act 1967 provides that intention is a subjective test. Thirdly, R v Nedrick (1986) ...read more.


However, there are possible law reforms within the draft criminal code 1989 that state that mens rea should be reformed with a move towards defining intention. This would give the judge more influence in stating as a certainty of what the law is - rather than a jury that is only "entitled" to find evidence of intent. Solutions for reforms may involve that there are degrees of murder as in America. Thus there would be different sentences for mercy killing and a maliciously planned murder. However this raises the dilemma of would this unnecessarily complicate the law by offering a way out for criminals or would it offer a solution that is more understanding of circumstances. This area was slightly reformed in 2004 when partial defences of provocation and diminished responsibility for lower degrees of blame were introduced. In conclusion, it would seem that there is not an urgent need of reform even though there are possible faults at present with ambiguity. Also the uncertainty of intent and that there is no discrimination between these intentions do require clarification and perhaps considered as manslaughter. The law in relation to murder has worked for hundreds of years and as with all law has constantly been adapted. ?? ?? ?? ?? Victoria McAlister ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

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

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

3 star(s)

A good essay, but the student could have also considered the mandatory life sentence (some have called for its abolition) and self-defence and the Tony Martin debate.

3 Stars.

Marked by teacher Edward Smith 23/07/2013

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 GCSE Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Discuss the essential differences between Civil and Criminal Law particularly in relation to their ...

    4 star(s)

    There is no guilty party because a person may be responsible for an act without realising or meaning to do wrong. There is no possibility of a person being sent to prison for a Civil wrong. Civil law exists primarily to compensate the victim(s), therefore it is clear that Criminal

  2. There are four different types of law, criminal, civil, common and statuate. In this ...

    you will be put into the defendant box to the right of the magistrates, followed by your defending solicitor. Next the prosecuting solicitor will enter and seat himself next to your lawyer.

  1. Criminal Law (Offences against the person) - revision notes

    There have been 3 cases to test the Nedrick direction: - * R v Gregory & Mott (1995) G gave M a knife and sais to stab the victim. She did and the victim died. Both charged with murder M said she didn't intenbd to stab victim, just did it.

  2. Study the concept of Reasonable man and reasonability in tort law.

    MODE OF CITATION A uniform mode of citation has been followed all over the project. CHAPTERISATION The entire text has been divided into 3 chapters SOURCES OF DATA Secondary sources of data in the form of various books and cases have been used..

  1. "Discuss the meaning and constitutional significance of the rule of law. Illustrate your answer ...

    (Reference in bibliography) The rule of law lastly means that the general principles of the constitution are the result of judicial decision of the courts in England. In many countries right such as right to personal liberty, freedom from arrest, freedom to hold public meeting are guaranteed by a written constitution; in England, it is not so.

  2. Should guns be banned in America?

    The main obstacle in removing firearms from citizens in the U.S. is the second Amendment of the Constitution. It reads: "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

  1. 'What defences does the law provide for journalists facing defamation cases?'

    This example also demonstrates another point that journalists should be aware of, to ensure their witnesses are prepared to give evidence. It is often the case that their account of events stands for more than the defendants ie. the journalist.

  2. Was Saxon justice harsh and superstitious?

    Imprisonment was rarely used as a punishment because it was expensive. Gaolers would have to be paid and criminals would have to be fed. This was impossible at a time when kings only collected taxes for wars or to pay for other out of the ordinary events.

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