R v Nedrick [1986]

Facts

  • The defendant poured paraffin though the letter box of a house, in which the victim (a child) was located
  • The defendant did not wish for anyone to die

Issue

  • Did the defendant murder the victim?

Decision

  • No

Reasoning

  • A conviction of manslaughter was substituted due to a defective buy xanax with paypal direction given by the judge
  • Where there is no direct intent, a judge is entitled to direct a jury that intent may be inferred if the resulting death was virtually certain and the defendant appreciated this virtual certainty (two independent requirements)
RELATED CASE  R v Mowatt [1968]

Posted in Criminal Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 25th December 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms