Murder Case Study

Evaluation of Murder:

The criminal offence of murder, while in better shape than many other offences, is still in need of updating and some reasonably minor adjustments, most notably in the areas of intent, self-defence, and the mandatory life sentence it imposes. It is unanimously agreed that the laws on murder need codifying.

The mens rea of murder requires intent or recklessness to kill or cause grievous boldily harm. Foresight of the consequences of the defendant 's voluntary actions are often enough to infer intent using the Nedrick test. This can lead to some cases, such as Hancock and Shankland, where the defendants neither intended death nor injury, were tried for murder.

In the case of R v Maloney, Lord Bridge said that it would be enough in the vast majority of cases for a judge to ask the jury to consider whether the prosecution had persuaded them that the defendant had intended a particular criminal consequence. It must be questioned whether intending to harm a person in a non-severe manner, should be the mens rea of an offence as dangerous and morally repugnant as murder.

Its proposed definition of murder covers intending to cause death; and intending to cause serious personal injury and being aware that he may cause death by doing so. This would mean that a defendant who did not intend death but did intend serious harm (most likely S18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861) would be able to be found guilty of murder; at the current time the mens rea for s18 offences satisfy the mens rea for murder