R v Dadson (1850)
- Dadson shot a person attempting to escape with stolen goods, which was by itself unlawful
- It was not unlawful to shoot a felon in the same circumstances
- Dadson didn’t know that his victim was a felon
- Was Dadson liable of shooting unlawfully with intent to disable; did it matter that Dadson didn’t know that his victim was a felon?
- Conviction upheld
- The offence could not be retrospectively justified; at the time of the offence, Dadson could not invoke the defence that he was shooting a felon at a later date
- Glanville Williams argued that the fact of shooting a (non-)felon should be considered part of the actus reus of the offence, such that Dadson did not commit the offence; ignoring his state of mind, the conduct was permitted by the state
Posted in Criminal Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 23rd December 2014