People v Murray
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1977 |
| Date | 01 January 1977 |
| Docket Number | [S.C. Nos. 137/8 of 1976] |
| Court | Supreme Court |
Capital murder - New offence - Proof - Mens rea - Recklessness -Murder of policeman acting in course of his duty - Criminal Justice Act, 1964 (No. 5), ss. 1, 4.
Until the year 1964, s. 1 of the Offences Against the State Act, 1861, provided that a person "convicted of murder" should suffer death; but by s. 5 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1964, the term "capital murder" was substituted for "murder"in s. 1 of the Act of 1861. Section 1 of the Act of 1964 provides that a person shall not be liable to suffer death for any offence other than (inter alia) "capital murder, namely - (i) murder of a member of the Garda SÃochána acting in the course of his duty . . ." Section 4 of the Act of 1964 states that where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not be murder unless the accused "intended to kill, or cause serious injury to, some person . . ." and provides that the accused shall be presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of his conduct, but that such presumption may be rebutted. The accused, who were husband and wife, escaped in a motor car after an armed bank robbery in which each of them had taken an active part. The driver of a private car, who was passing the bank at the time of the escape, pursued the robbers' car in his car until eventually the robbers' car stopped and the accused ran away from it. The pursuer stopped his car and ran after and overtook the husband. When the pursuer was about to seize the husband (who was then unarmed) the wife shot and killed the pursuer. The pursuer was a policeman and a member of the Garda SÃochána who was not in uniform and who was not on duty at the start of the chase. The accused were charged jointly in the Special Criminal Court on an indictment containing 11 counts, of which the first charged them with the commission of capital murder. They were convicted on the first count and sentenced to death by execution; they were also convicted on five other counts and sentenced to terms of penal servitude. The accused applied to the Court of Criminal Appeal for leave to appeal against their convictions. Held by the Court of Criminal Appeal (O'Higgins C.J., Doyle and McMahon JJ.), in dismissing the application, 1, that the offence of capital murder is not a new offence and that an accused may be convicted of that offence where the prosecution has proved (a) the ingredients required to constitute mens rea in regard to murder and (b) the fact...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v C. O'R
...but have elected to proceed with his conduct nonetheless.’ This has been the position since the decision in The People (DPP) v Murray [1977] IR 360. In cases of rape, recklessness means that the possibility that a woman was not consenting actually occurred in the mind of the accused. Where ......
-
DPP v Power
...OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S16 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S17 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S29 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1999 PART II PEOPLE (DPP) v MURRAY 1977 IR 360 SWEET v PARSLEY 1970 AC 132 C (C) & G (P) v IRELAND & ORS UNREP SUPREME 12.7.2005 2005/7/1439 2005 IESC 48 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1964 S1 DPP v ......
-
DPP v Fergal Cagney
..."recklessness" is a constituent of a criminal offence in Ireland the leading authority on its meaning is The People (DPP) v. Murray [1977] I.R. 360. The judgments of Henchy J., Walsh J. and Griffin J. make it clear that the required mens rea for the purposes of recklessness as to consequen......
-
McNulty v Ireland and Attorney General
...crime, in order for the proof of actus reus to constitute evidence of the necessary mens rea under section 41(3). 45 In this analysis The People v. Murray [1977] I.R. 360 is relevant. In Murray the Court considered the statutory offence of capital murder, and analysed whether the section r......
-
Using Civil Processes in Pursuit of Criminal Law Objectives: A Case Study of Non-Conviction-Based Asset Forfeiture
...2 Cf. J. Hall, ‘Interrelations of Criminal Law and Torts: I’ (1943) Columbia LR 753. 3 R v G [2004] 1 AC 1034; The People (DPP) v Murray [1977] IR 360. 4 McQuire v Western Morning News Co. Ltd [1903] 2 KB 100; Hall v Brooklands Auto Racing Club [1933] 1 KB205; Glasgow Corporation v Muir [19......
-
Exploring rape conviction rates: consent, false allegations and legal obstacles
...if the accused makes a 90 O’R (n 80) [36]. 91 See The People (DPP) v Cagney and McGrath [2008] 2 IR 111; The People (DPP) v Murray [1977] IR 360. 92 O’R (n 80) [47]. 93 The People (DPP) v Eadon [2019] IESC 98, [12]. [2020] Irish Judicial Studies Journal Vol 4(1) 207 IRISH JUDICIAL STUDIES J......
-
Recommended Irish reforms to the law of murder from the perspective of the Model Penal Code
...15 10 King v Attorney General [1981] I.R. 233 at 242, quoting O Dalaigh CJ in The People v O’Callaghan [1966] I.R. 501 at 509 11 [1977] I.R. 360 12 People (DPP) v Murray [1977] I.R. 360 13 Law Reform Commission (hereinafter “LRC”) 14 Law Reform Commission, Homicide: Murder and Involuntary M......
-
Crime control, the security state and constitutional justice in Ireland
...Attorney General and Another; PG vIreland, Attorney General and Another [200] 4 IR 1 at 25 per Denham J. Seealso People (DPP) vMurray [1977] IR 360.8. [2006] 4 IR 1.9. Section 2 of the same Act provided that where the girl was aged under 17 at the time of the intercourse, the offence waspun......