edit: i answered the wrong question
I should stop trying to flaunt my A level knowledge of causation everywhere.
Though I believe that wouldn't constitute a characteristic of the victim. I think you'd have to apply the daftness test.
I should stop trying to flaunt my A level knowledge of causation everywhere.
Though I believe that wouldn't constitute a characteristic of the victim. I think you'd have to apply the daftness test.
(edited 13 years ago)
I *think* there was a case where they held that the victim's belief that blood supplies were contaminated or something didn't count because if you stop yourself from getting better, the defendant can't be blamed. I'm not 100% sure though.
Original post by herrplamen
I have got a question regarding the 'eggshell skull rule' (taking the victim as you find him or her). I know it includes physical characteristics and religious beliefs but would it include V's refusal to receive a blood transfusion due to his belief that all the blood supplies are contaminated? Is the chain of causation broken in this case?
Thank you.
Thank you.
R v Blaue, does not brake the chain of causation.
Original post by Swimmer
R v Blaue, does not brake the chain of causation.
That's the general rule. But i think the OP was asking about when the belief stopping the blood transfusion was a bit ludicrous - because if it's not a sensible belief, i think the rule may actually be the chain is broken by the victim's act.
Original post by herrplamen
I have got a question regarding the 'eggshell skull rule' (taking the victim as you find him or her). I know it includes physical characteristics and religious beliefs but would it include V's refusal to receive a blood transfusion due to his belief that all the blood supplies are contaminated? Is the chain of causation broken in this case?
Thank you.
Thank you.
I think so, as in R v Blaue it was due to being a Jehovah's witness so he refused a transfusion on religious grounds, but here he has no real reasoning for refusal of a transfusion. If he had a mental illness involving paranoia however that is another matter and may not break the chain of causation.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Applying for biological natural science at Cambridge without chemistry?
- Are rules reduced in nuance in favour of "general rule" or do people erode info?
- Chances of getting an offer from UCL Bsc Economics?
- Economics PG Dissertation
- History Coursework
- Resit of Btec applied law Pearson
- UCL Psychology
- AQA A Level Law Paper 1 26th May 2023
- Does LSE favour private school applicants
- A Level subjects for Biological Sciences: advice thread
- Causal mechanisms and correlation
- Help - A Level - Politics and History
- Is it easier for a private student to get into Oxford than Cambridge?
- History a level struggling
- A-level law exam questions and structuring
- oxford maths with A*A*A
- A-level option: psychology? (hoping to go into medicine)
- Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]
- AQA History A-level Transformation of China 1936-1997
- High paying job
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
