Preview

Law and Mrs. Brine

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
860 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Law and Mrs. Brine
[HOUSE OF LORDS.] AND
Criminal Law - Murder - Onus of Proof - Accident - Unlawful Intention - Direction to the Jury - Reasonable Doubt of Guilt - Criminal Appeal Act, 1907 (7 Edw. 7, c. 23), s. 4. In a trial for murder the Crown must prove death as the result of a voluntary act of the prisoner and malice of the prisoner. When evidence of death and malice has been given, the prisoner is entitled to show by evidence or by examination of the circumstances adduced by the Crown that the act on his part which caused death was either unintentional or provoked. If the jury are either satisfied with his explanation or, upon a review of all the evidence, are left in reasonable doubt whether, even if his explanation be not accepted, the act was unintentional or provoked, the prisoner is entitled to be acquitted.
Statement of the Law in Foster's Crown Law (1762), p. 255, and summing up of Tindal C.J. in _Rex v. _Greenacre (1837) 8 C. & P. 35 disapproved.
Order of the Court of Criminal Appeal reversed.
APPEAL from an order of the Court of Criminal Appeal refusing leave to Reginald Woolmington, the appellant, to appeal against his conviction of the wilful murder of Violet Kathleen Woolmington, who was his wife.
The appellant was convicted on February 14, 1935, at Bristol Assizes before Swift J. and a jury. The appellant and his wife were married on August 25, 1934. He was a farm labourer and bore a good character. His age was twenty-one and a half years, and his wife was four years younger. They lived at Castleton, near Sherborne, on the farm of one Cheeseman, the appellant's employer. On November 22, 1934, the appellant's wife left him and went to live with her mother, Lilian Smith, a widow, at 24 Newtown, Milborne Port. The appellant wanted her to go back to him and made efforts to induce her to go back, but she would not.
Next door to Mrs. Smith lived a Mrs. Brine, a sister of Mrs. Smith and aunt of the deceased woman. On the morning of December 10, 1934,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Case Brief

    • 7225 Words
    • 24 Pages

    NOTICE: [***1] THESE ARE NOT OFFICIAL HEADNOTES OR SYLLABI AND ARE NEITHER APPROVED IN ADVANCE NOR ENDORSED BY THE COURT. PLEASE REVIEW THE CASE IN FULL.…

    • 7225 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    McHugh J put forward that the fatal wound could not be determined as to whether it was caused in the first instance or the second instance, and that the wording used by O’Bryan J was reflective of whether or not the jury found the Appellant had inflicted the fatal blow in the first or second instances and that if that the jury had in fact found that the appellant had inflicted the fatal blow in the first instance that provocation could not be a defence in the second instance.…

    • 1100 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief

    • 667 Words
    • 3 Pages

    * Is there error in the court denying a jury instructions on criminally negligent homicide, instead instructing on reckless manslaughter, which alleges the defendant had intent to kill, when there is enough evidence to support the theory the defendant’s conduct was unintentional.…

    • 667 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    R Vs Robert

    • 577 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Roberts was “convicted by Keenen J., sitting without a jury, of aggravated assault and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.” (R v. Roberts, p 5) The sentence was postponed, however, from 2001 to 2004, because of a pending application submitted by the Crown. The application was to submit Roberts to psychiatric testing to determine if he would be convicted as a dangerous offender under section 753 of the Criminal Code or a long-term offender under section 753.1 of the Criminal Code. The application was approved and the assessment of Roberts proceeded. The sentencing judge, LaForme J., found that Roberts never fit the criteria to be a dangerous or long-term offender as described in the Criminal Code and he found that Roberts would not be sentenced as such. Roberts was sentenced to “two years less a day plus three years probation on terms requiring submission to psychiatric treatment, medication treatment, drug and alcohol treatment, plus testing and other rehabilitative conditions.” (R v. Roberts, p…

    • 577 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    First-degree premeditated murder. Four shots to the head, three behind the victims ear and one above her eyebrow, two more pierced through her chest and several scattered across her body. Yet, he still claims, “it was unintentional”. The Defendant claimed that he missed the first two shots of firing at her. She reacted by jumping on the bed and shoving him, resulting in him shoving her onto the floor and shooting her in the head and all over her body as she lay on the floor.…

    • 543 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Regina v. G and another (Appellants) (On Appeal form the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Tha case was first judged in the Magistrates Court, then appealed in the Divisional Court and finally in the House of Lords. The determining judges were Lord Reid, Lord Diplockm, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Pearson, and Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest,…

    • 1505 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Old Bailey - Bigamy

    • 2771 Words
    • 12 Pages

    The main criminal court of London from the late 17th century to the early 20th century was known as the Old Bailey. Many of the proceedings of this court are available online, and provide an insight into the London justice system from the year 1674 until 1913. However, only the years 1674 through 1700 will be observed in this instance, and only for one observed offence (though there are many listed). These proceedings, as stated, can provide a glimpse into the lives of commoners accused of crimes and brought to trial for these actions. The observed offence for this instance is listed under “Sexual Offences,” and the subcategory is bigamy.…

    • 2771 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Law: Magill V Magill Hca

    • 2101 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Sappideen C, Vines P, Grant H & Watson P, Torts: Commentary and Materials, Thomson, Sydney…

    • 2101 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    R. V. Northumberland Compensation Appeal Tribunal, ex P. Shaw (1951) 1 K.B. 711: (1952) 1 K.B. 338…………………………………………………...13…

    • 2817 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Business Letter to Lawyer

    • 895 Words
    • 4 Pages

    James, N 2012 Business Law 2nd Ed. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Steele v Tardiani 1946 72 CLR 386; [1946] HCA 21, pg302…

    • 895 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Chitty- Penalties

    • 13828 Words
    • 64 Pages

    The Privy Council659 has cited with approval660 the view of Dickson J. in the Supreme Court of…

    • 13828 Words
    • 64 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Criminal Law Study Guide

    • 19894 Words
    • 80 Pages

    This is the killing of a human being. The most serious crime is murder and the difference between it and manslaughter is in the intention of the defendant. Murder is a specific intent crime and manslaughter is a basic intent crime.…

    • 19894 Words
    • 80 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “Copyright law protects foxes better than hedgehogs”. Per Lord Hoffmann in Designer Guild v Russell Williams [2000] 1 WLR 2416. Discuss.”…

    • 4777 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Asfar and Co v Blundell (1896) 1 QB 123 Court of Appeal (Lord Esher MR, Lopes and Kay LJJ)…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays