Criminal law NZ - What is murder and manslaughter in NZ

📝 Download my FREE guide on how to make exam notes in my ingenious style: julieschmidtla...
🏆 I was top of this subject at law school and 13 others. My law school exam notes are incredible and I have already sold hundreds to law students.
➡️ Here's where you can purchase my notes for this subject: julieschmidtla...
---
Step 1: s 158 - is homicide definition met? Causation?
Step 2: s 160(2) - is it culpable homicide?
Step 3: s 167 or s 168 - is it murder? (circumstances and MR)
Step 4: if not murder, is it infanticide s 178?
Step 5: if not, is it manslaughter s 171? Or manslaughter suicide pact s 180?
This content is not intended to be legal advice. Julie Schmidt takes no responsibility for any result that happens as a result of a person relying on her content.
Mens rea - Criminal law lectures - Criminal lawyer
Are you studying law in New Zealand? Check out all of my law school exam notes on my website.

[@evemcl7417]

wow- this is so helpful!!! 😍😇 & perfect timing for criminal exam! Thank youuu Julie.

[@julieschmidtlaw]

Aww thanks so much Eve 🥰🌼🌻💕

[@gerardaygun2115]

... also would be good to see you summarise how indirect slaughter through medical malpractice by lawyers, judges, doctors and nurses relate to the 'prosecutors fallacy' please include detail on how temporal causation along with bayesian inference allows us to clearly identify perpetrating judges and doctors.

[@tatidemelo7188]

Hey, so a couple years back there was a killing that happend, one of the killers got manslaughter and the other got murder, why would this happen?

[@julieschmidtlaw]

Hey, it depends on what each person's actions and thoughts were at the time of the killing. For example, one person may have intended to kill the victim (had the mens rea of "intention") and actually killed the person. The other person may not have intended to kill the other person and may not have been reckless either, but were somehow involved, they they could get manslaughter. Another example is in the R v Kuka case where the family member who gave the child the injuries that caused his death was guilty of murder, but the mother who did not intervene to help that child (despite having a legal duty to do so as the child's mother) got manslaughter. Hope that helps!