DPP v Smith (1961)

Driving off with policeman holding on to car

To get away from the policeman

Policeman fell off car and killed by oncoming vehicle

Person intends the natural & probable

consequences of his

acts (HL).

Section 8 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967

To reverse the decision in DPP v Smith

Jury not bound to find that D intended result just because it was a natural and probable result of D's act.  Look at all relevant evidence and decide D's intention.

Hyam v DPP (1975)

D put burning newspaper through letterbox

To frighten the woman who lived in the house

Death of lady's two children

Enough that D foresaw that his actions were likely or highly likely to cause death or gbh (HL).

R v Moloney (1985)

Firing live bullet

Shooting contest

Death of stepfather

Jury to ask themselves:

(1) Was death or gbh the natural consequence of D's act? And

(2) Did the D foresee this?

If yes to both questions, then can infer intention (HL).

R v Hancock and Shankland (1986)

D's threw concrete block on to motorway

Intended to block the road used by non-striking miners

Death of taxi driver

The greater the probability of a consequence occurring, the more likely it was foreseen, and the more likely it was foreseen the more likely it was intended.

Foresight of consequences is only evidence of intention (HL).

CASE/STATUTE

GUILTY ACT

PURPOSE

UNDESIRED CONSEQUENCE

DECISION