• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  • Level: GCSE
  • Subject: Law
  • Document length: 1600 words

murder. In this case the accused, Mr Cheatham stabbed his wife, three old year old daughter and three month old daughter numerous times.

Extracts from this document...


Introduction In this case the accused, Mr Cheatham stabbed his wife, three old year old daughter and three month old daughter numerous times. His wife and older daughter died from their wounds but skilled surgery managed to save the life of his three-month-old daughter. The prosecution would want to try the accused for two counts of murder (of his wife and older child) and one count of attempted murder (the younger child). However, the accused may be able to argue the defence of insanity, or in the alternative, diminished responsibility, which would result in either acquittal or a murder conviction being reduced to manslaughter. Firstly what the prosecution must prove to gain a conviction on the charges will be discussed. Secondly what the defence must prove in order to escape conviction will be discussed. Last of all the two different cases will be assessed and which case appears to be the stronger side will be suggested. The relevant jurisdiction has been assumed to be the Australian Capital Territory, and all referred legislation references in this paper are Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) unless otherwise specified. 1. MURDER In order for the accused to be convicted of murder of his wife and 3-year-old child, the prosecution will need to prove: (a)That the accused did an act which caused the death of the two victims; and (b)The accused did so with: i. ...read more.


It was the last possible act." In this case it could be said the accused's acts were sufficiently proximate and fulfilled the 'last act' test, as there was no more that the accused could do to complete the murder. The accused had taken all possible steps to murder his daughter, it was only the end result that did not work out. 2. INSANITY In order for the accused to be acquitted for the murders and attempted murder on the grounds of insanity, the defence will need to prove: (a) That the accused had a mental dysfunction that affects a person to a substantially disabling degree); and (b) The accused was incapable of knowing: i. what he was doing, or ii. that his actions were wrong. (Section 428) The court will leave the first question to be decided by the jury, on the basis of expert medical evidence. This is largely a matter of fact, and the defence will put forward the evidence of Dr Milton to show the accused was suffering from a mental dysfunction, namely hypochondriasis. The defence will then need to show the accused was acting under such defect of reason that he did not know his actions were wrong, or the accused did not have the capacity to reason and think with sense and composure. (M'Naghten [1983] 8 ER 718 at 722 ) ...read more.


3. WHICH CASE IS STRONGER? The prosecutions case may appear stronger and their case already proven, as it is fair to say that the accused killed, (or attempted to kill), his wife and two children. He fulfilled all the elements required for a conviction of murder and attempted murder. The accused made the appropriate actions towards killing his family and he also showed intent, firstly by expressing his intent, stabbing them numerous times and lastly being 'visibly distressed' when he found out that his youngest daughter was still alive. The defence need to prove insanity or diminished responsibility only on the balance of probabilities. But at the same time the prosecution must shed doubt upon the defence's case. Insanity will result in full acquittal whereas diminished responsibility will result in a murder conviction being dropped to manslaughter. I believe that the accused has a strong case to argue on not guilty on the grounds of insanity, as based on expert witnesses,(DR Milton) I think it can be proven that the level of the accsued's hypochondriasis rendered him insane, as no sane person or 'reasonable man' would kill their family even under the same circumstances. I do not think the accused was acting as a reasonable man and I believe that his delusions caused by his hypochondriasis were so great that it can be proven that he was probably insane. The accused I believe he did not know the quality of his actions. Therefore I believe that the accused should be acquitted on the grounds of insanity. ...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

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

    Law of Evidence - R v Kearley

    5 star(s)

    But can it truly be said that what occurred in Kearley amounted to an implied assertion ? According to Hirst24 a mere request for drugs contains no assertive words, nothing which could be described as either true or false. It is submitted that this view is entirely correct.

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

    Guilty - MR before the intoxication Problems of the defence of intoxication 1. The illogical distinction between specific and basic intent crimes. This produces very doubtful results Rape Basic intent so defence is rejected Attempted Rape Specific intent therefore defence is accepted 2. Very difficult for juries to understand E.g.

  1. The Age Of Criminal Responsibility

    Silje was stripped, stoned and beaten, and left for dead. I do not understand why and I will never recover, but I don't hate the boys. I think they understood what they had done, but not the consequences. The boys went back to school, were helped by psychologists and have

  2. What is an indictable offence and how is it brought to trial?

    Proceedings against member states may be brought by the commission, or by other member states, and involve alleged breaches of community law by the country in question. Proceedings against EU institutions may be brought by member states, other EU institutions and in certain circumstances, by individual citizens or organisations.


    The claim was brought after an intoxicated teenager fell off the cliff and sustained grave injuries. Each of the judgments, at one point or another, discuss the problem that arises when the interests of an individual must be weighed against the interest of the greater community.

  2. In order to secure a conviction for an attempted crime the accused must be ...

    It is not until D goes beyond the merely preparatory acts that he can be held criminally liable for an attempt. The "proximity test" examines how close D's acts were to the full offence. The "Rubicon test" examines if D has gone 'beyond the point of no return'.

  1. Discuss the persuasive techniques used by Michael Moore in three scenes from his film ...

    which is again political bias and selective omission as it disregards the information that he became a tyrannical dictator that murdered his people. The use of Statistics when describing the 200000 civilians killed seems duly informed, as there is no source.

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

    Reasonable man in the "Hurly Burly" of life the tort of negligence only refers to a reasonable man but not a perfect man. The reasonable man test largely rests on common sense and the exigencies of everyday life must be recognized.

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