Please help with criminal Law; Thank you

done

1) Either murder or possibly constructive manslaughter (run through the test). Akeem might be guilty of the murder of Lenny. It does not matter that he had not intended to shoot at Lenny and had aimed for Akeem. Look at the doctrine of transferred malice. I'm not sure if there would be a claim for the attempted murder of John also.

2) Akeem might be guilty of the murder of Lenny. . The actus reus of murder is the act of killing of another. The act of manslaughter is the same minus the intention which is replaced with recklessness etc. The judgement of R v Woolin means that the jury can 'infer' intention in the event that the consequences of an action were almost a virtual certainty. It might be hard for Akeem to prove that he didn't have the intent considering where he fired from. It's quite hard to believe that he missed from that close..

3) The mens rea for murder is the intention to cause death or grievous bodily harm. Does Akeem fulfill this requirement? Did he intend to kill John? if so that will be transferred to Lenny and combined with the actus reus.

4) Defences may include 'diminished responsibility (unlikely) loss of control (check the requirements) self defence/insanity not likely to be applicable.

5) Sue may have committed an offence (slightly rusty on this) likely to depend on whether she had assumed responsibility to Lenny. For example, if she had attempted to save Lenny and then realised that she was running late and left. She would possibly have committed an offence. This is looking at 'omissions' and liability for them. So cases such as R v Pittswood, R v Dytham should be read. R v Dytham is a similar case where a police man witnessed a killing but failed to act because it would result in him having to stay behind. That seems very similar to the act of Sue, however the duty imposed on a policeman and lifeguard may be different.

Nurse Freya is not criminally liable since her act did not break the chain of causation and Akeem's act is still the operating and substantial cause of Lenny's death. The 'hustle and bustle' of hospitals is to be acknowledged in such circumstances. (R v Cheshire)

You'd need to add a number of cases in support. I've gone blank at the minute (doesn't bode well for my exam!)

Hopefully someone else posts because I could be completely off the ball.