Yes he becomes responsible for the death of the lady. It would be constructive act manslaughter not murder but he is still responsible for her death. The malice is transferred which is the assault and in this instance death results from the assault so we can construct the manslaughter. I am assuming you are a unit 2 student so don't worry about the manslaughter element all that matters is that youi understand that malice can be transferred providing it is the same type of offence.
Thanks a billion for your videos! Can the mens rea in transferred malice be one of oblique intention?Can the doctrine of transferred malice be used in a case scenario in which D intended to break a glass window but ended up causing the death of a person?
Yes oblique intent is good enough for transferred malice but no the general elements of the actus reus of the offence has to be the same. So there can be no transferred malice where the intent is to cause criminal damage and the result is homicide (unless of cause the intent was to cause death through Criminal Damage under s1(2) of the Criminal damage Act 1971) hope that makes sense
In Mitchell's case, does he now become responsible for the death of the elderly lady or can just two charges of assault be brought against him. One for the man he pushed and one for the dead lady?
