Attempt To Commit Murder And Related Offenses
The attempt to commit murder refers to an act where an individual intends to kill another person but ultimately fails to do so due to various reasons, such as intervention, lack of resources, or external circumstances. Even if the victim survives or the murder doesn't succeed, the intention to kill and the act towards its completion may still lead to serious legal consequences.
In many legal systems, attempted murder is treated as a serious crime, often carrying penalties comparable to murder, depending on the jurisdiction. Below is a detailed explanation of attempted murder and related offenses, with examples from significant case law.
1. R v. White (1910, UK)
Case Overview:
In R v. White, the defendant, White, was accused of attempting to poison his mother with cyanide in an attempt to inherit her estate. White placed cyanide in his mother’s drink, but she died of a heart attack before drinking the poisoned beverage. As a result, White was charged with attempted murder.
Legal Issue:
The key legal issue in this case was whether White's actions could be classified as attempted murder, given that his mother died from a heart attack and not the poison he intended to administer.
Court's Decision:
The court ruled that attempted murder requires both intent to kill and an act toward the commission of the crime. While the victim did not die from the poison, White’s intent and the act of poisoning were sufficient to establish that he had attempted to commit murder.
Outcome:
The court found White guilty of attempted murder, even though the victim died from an unrelated cause. This case established that the failure to complete the murder does not absolve a defendant of criminal responsibility if they intended to kill and took substantial steps towards the act.
Legal Principle:
Attempted murder does not require that the victim actually die, as long as the defendant had intent to kill and engaged in a substantial step towards its commission. It reinforces the principle that intent and action are key elements in proving an attempt to commit murder.
2. People v. Anderson (California, 1968)
Case Overview:
In People v. Anderson, the defendant Anderson was convicted of attempted murder after shooting at a police officer. Anderson had been involved in a robbery and, upon encountering the officer, fired multiple shots at him. The officer survived, though Anderson’s intent to kill was clear from his actions.
Legal Issue:
The question in this case was whether Anderson’s intent and actions could constitute attempted murder, even though the officer was not killed.
Court’s Decision:
The court ruled that intent to kill could be inferred from the defendant’s actions. The fact that Anderson fired a weapon at the officer, without any provocation or reasonable chance of survival for the officer, made it clear that the act was intentional and purposeful.
Outcome:
Anderson was convicted of attempted murder, even though the officer survived. The case reinforced that attempted murder charges apply even if the victim survives, provided that the defendant acted with intent and took substantial steps toward completing the crime.
Legal Principle:
The case affirmed that intent to kill and the act of attempting to kill are sufficient to constitute attempted murder. The defendant does not have to succeed in killing the victim to be guilty of attempted murder.
3. State v. Rusk (1981, Delaware, USA)
Case Overview:
In State v. Rusk, the defendant, Rusk, was charged with attempted murder after he attacked his girlfriend in a fit of rage. He strangled her to the point of unconsciousness but stopped before she died. The girlfriend managed to escape and call the police.
Legal Issue:
The main legal question was whether the strangulation amounted to an attempt to commit murder, given that the victim survived the attack.
Court’s Decision:
The Delaware court ruled that the defendant's actions—strangulation with the intent to kill—were enough to establish the crime of attempted murder, even though the victim survived. The court noted that the intent to kill was clear from the defendant’s actions and that strangulation was a substantial step toward committing the crime.
Outcome:
Rusk was found guilty of attempted murder, despite the fact that the victim survived. The case emphasized that substantial steps toward committing murder, along with the intent to kill, are key components in an attempted murder charge.
Legal Principle:
This case underscored that a failure to complete the murder (in this case, the victim surviving) does not diminish the seriousness of the crime if the defendant has taken significant steps toward committing murder with intent to kill.
4. People v. Martinez (California, 2001)
Case Overview:
In People v. Martinez, the defendant, Martinez, was accused of attempting to murder a man during a confrontation in which he fired a gun at the victim. The victim was injured but survived. The defendant claimed that he did not intend to kill but acted in self-defense.
Legal Issue:
The key issue was whether Martinez’s actions constituted attempted murder, even if he did not intend to kill. The defense argued that the defendant's actions were self-defense, not an attempt to commit murder.
Court’s Decision:
The court held that even if the defendant's actions were in the heat of the moment, firing a gun at the victim with the intent to harm can be sufficient to establish attempted murder. The court found that self-defense does not excuse an intentional shooting unless the defendant could show that he had a reasonable belief that his life was in immediate danger.
Outcome:
Martinez was convicted of attempted murder. The case reinforced that the intent to kill and dangerous actions such as firing a weapon can support a charge of attempted murder, even if the defendant claims self-defense.
Legal Principle:
The case highlighted the importance of intent in attempted murder charges. Even if the defendant claims self-defense, the court will evaluate whether their actions were reasonable and if the intent to kill can be inferred from the actions taken.
5. R v. Tosti (1997, UK)
Case Overview:
In R v. Tosti, the defendant, Tosti, was charged with attempted murder after he set up an explosive device to blow up a bank. The bomb was discovered before it could detonate, and no one was injured. The defendant was apprehended by the police before the device went off.
Legal Issue:
The central question was whether setting up the bomb with the intent to cause a fatal explosion constituted an attempted murder, even though the bomb did not detonate and no one was harmed.
Court’s Decision:
The court ruled that attempted murder is not only about the completion of the crime but about the intent to kill and the substantial steps taken towards the completion of that crime. Even though the bomb did not explode, the defendant had taken a significant step toward committing murder.
Outcome:
Tosti was convicted of attempted murder, even though the actual act of murder was not completed. This case reinforced that attempts at serious crimes, including murder, are punishable when the defendant takes substantial steps toward completing the crime.
Legal Principle:
The substantial step test is crucial in determining attempted murder. Even if the murder does not succeed, preparation and action toward completing the crime are sufficient to support an attempted murder charge.
Conclusion
The legal principle of attempted murder revolves around the intent to kill and substantial steps taken toward completing the crime. In all the cases discussed, whether the victim survived or not, the court focused on the defendant's intent and the actions taken toward achieving that intent. Attempted murder is a serious offense in legal systems around the world, and the cases above illustrate how courts address this crime, ensuring that attempts to take life, even when unsuccessful, are met with appropriate legal consequences.
RELATED Blog
0 comments