- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law-Hancock and Shankland (1986)
Case Summary:
Case Summary:
- Facts: During a miner's strike, Hancock and Shankland (H & S) pushed a concrete block and post from a bridge onto a road. The block struck a vehicle driven by V, killing M (a passenger).
- Charge: Murder
- Held: H & S were found not guilty of murder.
- Critique of Moloney Guidelines: Lord Scarman criticized the Moloney guidelines for their omission of probability when assessing intention.
- Probability and Intention: The case emphasizes the crucial role of probability in determining intention.
- The greater the probability of death or serious injury resulting from the defendant's actions, the more likely it is that the defendant:
- Foresaw the consequence.
- Intended the consequence (if it was foreseen).
- The greater the probability of death or serious injury resulting from the defendant's actions, the more likely it is that the defendant:
- Unsafe and Misleading Guidelines: The court found the Moloney guidelines "unsafe and misleading" without the inclusion of probability.
- Practical Implication: This case necessitates a careful consideration of the likelihood of a particular outcome when evaluating whether a defendant intended that outcome.
0 Comments