Potential Benefit Easier for the P to prove Unfair on the D Takes less time for a case in court Encourages companies/D’s to comply with the law It is harder for the P to prove It prevents defences being raised as an excuse Makes regulating areas of the law that affect public health easier Protects the public from companies/D’s who do not take proper care As the punishment is normally only a fine there is little social stigma in being found guilty Correct Benefits Related case name

Learning Objectives

 Discuss the concept of transferred malice.

 Apply your new knowledge on transferred malice to an exam question in order to demonstrate understanding.

Transferred Malice

 This is where the D’s MR is transferred from the intended V to the actual V.  P can use this approach to proving the MR of the crime as long as: 1.

2.

It is a similar type of offence The MR will transfer person to person or object to object

R v Latimer R v Pembliton R v Mitchell

D was arguing with V1 and V2 in a pub and took off his belt and struck V1 one with it.

The belt then bounced of V1 and struck V2. D was charged with battery on V2.

D threw a stone at a crown intending to hit one of the people. He missed and the stone broke a window instead. D was charged with criminal damage.

D became angry in a queue as the person in front would not move up. D pushed V1 who fell into V2. V2 , an old frail woman fell over and broke her hip

R v Mitchell R v Latimer R v Pembliton

As it is a similar type of offence and it is person to As it is a similar type of offence and it is person to person TM can be used. As L intended to strike V1 with the belt this proves the MR of battery which TM allows to transfer automatically to proving the MR on V2.

As it isn't a similar type of criminal damage.

person TM can be used. offence and it person to reckless as to causing As M intended to push V1 object TM cannot be used. either D intended or was with this proves the MR of The P would have to prove battery which TM allows to transfer automatically to proving the MR on V2. The old lady died and D was charged with manslaughter and found guilty.

R v Latimer (1886)

 D appealed on the ground that he had not intended to hurt the woman and therefore lacked the MR for the offence.

 The court rejected his appeal stating that the MR of a crime does not have to relate to a named V.

Mitchell (1983)

 The court said that although there was no direct contact between the D and the V, she was injured as a direct result of his act….

 So the MR was transferred to the V.

 

R v Pembliton

Transferred malice did not apply as the breaking of the window (criminal damage) was not the same offence as hitting someone with a stone (battery).

For D to be guilty, the prosecution would have to prove that D had the MR for criminal damage.

Why?

 To ensure that there is a conviction when someone is truly guilty.

Now, try to answer this exam question…

Explain the meaning of ‘transferred malice’.

(5 marks) *June 10

PLAN

 Give a definition of transferred malice.

 When is TM successful? State and explain a case.

 When does TM not work? State and explain a case.

Learning Objectives

 Discuss the concept of transferred malice.

 Apply your new knowledge on transferred malice to an exam question in order to demonstrate understanding.