Examples Of Actus Reus Of Murder

Murder:

The offence of murder is an example of unlawful homicide; it is defined by Sir Coke as the "unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being, who is under the [Queen's] peace, with malice aforethought, express or implied."

The actus reus of murder is the "unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being, who in under the monarch's peace".

To break it down:

An unlawful killing is, quite simply, a person causing that is not allowed in law. An example of a death permitted by law is a soldier killing an enemy in a time of war. Killing in self-defence can, depending on the circumstances, be considered a legal action.

A person's omission which leads to a death is not unlawful unless there is a duty for that person to act. This duty can

Firstly, those who are in a persistent vegetative state but being kept 'alive' by life-support machines.

The higher courts are the only bodies allowed to give permission to lawfully withdraw life support from those in such states, an example of this can be seen in Airedale NhS Trust v Bland. If the court does not grant permission then the turning off of life support machines can form the actus reus of murder. It should be noted that in Malcherek and Steel it was established that the turning off of such support does not break the chain of causation, and if the person in the vegetative state was put there by another person's actions then that person may be guilty of murder.

The second example is more contentious as it deals with unborn foetuses. A foetus in the womb is not considered a "reasonable person in being" until it is fully expelled from the mother's body, there is some disagreement over whether or not the baby, once born, must take a breath or have the umbilical cord cut to be considered a person in being. While the expectation for the baby to have taken its first breath is often considered reasonable, the possible requirement for the cord having to be cut is not. This may have something to do with the slowly growing popularity/commonality of "lotus births" whereby the baby remains attached to the placenta until it dries and naturally

This doesn't mean the defendant has to be the only cause, simply that he is a "more than minimal" cause - Cato. The "thin-skull" rule (take your victim as you find him) requires that the jury and court holds the defendant responsible for any injuries that arise from the individual peculiarities of the victim - Blaue - in this specific case the victim's religion (she was a Jehovah's Witness) refused a blood transfusion that would have saved her. It was ruled that the defendant was guilty of her murder due to the rule of taking your victim as you find