Trial·Breaker SQE1
SQE1 › FLK2 › Criminal Law and Practice › Homicide
SQE1 · FLK2 · Criminal Law and Practice

Homicide — SQE1 Criminal question

A worked single-best-answer question on homicide, with why each wrong option is wrong — the way SQE1 traps candidates.

Homicide

Tina owned a house divided into two flats and was in financial difficulty. To claim on the insurance, she set fire to the ground-floor flat at 3 am, knowing that her tenant, Ursula, was asleep in the upstairs flat. Tina says she hoped Ursula would escape and did not want her to be hurt. Ursula died of smoke inhalation. Tina is charged with murder, and the jury must consider whether she intended to kill or cause serious harm.

Which of the following best describes how the judge should direct the jury on intention?

  1. AThe jury may find intention only if it was Tina's purpose to kill or cause serious harm to Ursula.
  2. BThe jury may find intention if they are sure that death or serious harm was a virtual certainty as a result of Tina's actions and that Tina appreciated this.
  3. CThe jury must find intention if they are sure that Tina foresaw death or serious harm as a probable consequence.
  4. DThe jury may convict of murder if Tina was reckless as to whether Ursula might be killed or seriously harmed.
  5. EThe jury must find intention if death or serious harm was a virtual certainty, whether or not Tina appreciated this.
Show answer and reasoning
B is the best answer. Where the defendant's purpose was not to kill or cause serious harm, the jury is not entitled to find the necessary intention unless they are sure that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty (barring some unforeseen intervention) as a result of the defendant's actions and that the defendant appreciated that this was the case (R v Woollin). Such foresight is evidence from which intention may be found, not a rule that requires it.

Rule: The jury may find intention where death or serious harm was a virtual certainty as a result of the defendant's actions and the defendant appreciated that this was so.

  • A Intention is not confined to direct intention; oblique intention may be found on the Woollin direction. (wrong rule)
  • C Foresight of a probable consequence is not enough; the consequence must be a virtual certainty, and even then the jury is only entitled to find intention. (wrong rule)
  • D Recklessness is not sufficient mens rea for murder. (wrong rule)
  • E Woollin requires that the defendant herself appreciated the virtual certainty, and the jury is entitled, not obliged, to find intention. (wrong rule)

Source: R v Woollin [1999] 1 AC 82; R v Moloney [1985] AC 905

Practise more Criminal Law and Practice   All Criminal subtopics