preview

Actus Reus Of Murder Essay

Good Essays
Open Document

Introduction In this problem question, I will consider David’s criminal liability for murder. I will also consider whether Dr Hapless had committed the actus reus of murder. David In order for David to be criminally liable for murder, it must be shown that he had committed both the actus reus and the mens rea for murder. The first element to look at is the actus reus of murder. The actus reus, literally ‘wrongful act’, of murder is the unlawful killing of another person in the Queen’s peace. There are four requirements that must be fulfilled in order to consider David’s actions the actus reus of murder. Firstly, the defendant must have killed unlawfully; he must not be able to rely on the defense of self-defense[1]; secondly, it must be shown that the defendant caused the death of the victim, or at least accelerated the victim’s death by more than a negligible amount; thirdly, the victim must be alive, which excludes fetuses and people that are already dead; fourthly, the killing was not of enemy aliens during war and under battle conditions. David commits two actions towards Victor that could potentially be considered the actus reus of murder. Firstly, he ‘charges head first at Victor’, …show more content…

The test for factual (‘but for’) causation requires a jury to consider whether, but for the defendant’s unlawful actions, the harm would have occurred at the same time and in the same way that it did[7]. The requirement for legal causation is that the act was an operating and substantial cause of the result. It is important to note that there may be several different operating and substantial causes of the result, so more than one person can be responsible for the result[8]. Legal causation must be established in order to fulfill one of the requirements of the actus reus of murder. Beyond this, the defendant’s actions would also have to be unlawful, directed towards a living person, and occur in the Queen’s

Get Access