You are a trainee solicitor with the CPS. You receive the following email from your supervisor: To: Aaron From: Supervisor Subject: The death of Jamie Stewart I have a meeting tomorrow with Detective Inspector Nigel Helfferich to give charging advice on the Jamie Stewart case. As you know, the police arrested and interviewed Simon Glenn who was responsible for the attack on the victim. He is 18 years of age. However, it appears that there was a misdiagnosis by a junior doctor, Dr Charles Ramsden, who saw Jamie in Accident and Emergency (A&E) and he has also been interviewed about the death of his patient. Please look at the interview records of Simon and Dr Ramsden [extracts attached]. In due course, I will consider the evidential and public interest tests before deciding on my charging advice but, in the first instance, I would like you to prepare a presentation covering the following points in relation to the potential liability of Simon Glenn only. Simon Glenn 1. What must be proved to establish: a) the actus reus for murder? b) the mens rea for murder? 2. Consider whether any of the partial defences apply, setting out the test(s) and indicating who needs to prove what. For all of the above points, please provide me with the relevant supporting authority (statute and case law) as well as applying the facts to the law. Note: You are not required to discuss involuntary manslaughter nor Dr Ramsden's potential liability for gross negligence manslaughter.

Extracts from audibly recorded interview of Simon Glenn:

Tape times PARTICULARS OF INTERVIEW

5.00

5.40

5.50

6.00

NH: As I'm sure you're aware, I am investigating the death of Jamie Stewart yesterday evening. Please can you tell me what happened last night? SG I was hanging around in the local community centre with some other people when I hit Jamie. NH: Why did you do that? SG: He started to taunt me about my younger brother Kyle. He died in a car crash last month. Kyle had been a passenger in the car and the crash hadn't been anything to do with him, but he was like making it out that it was Kyle's fault and saying that the roads would be safer now he was dead. NH: So how did that make you feel? SG: Well, obviously, I was really upset. NH: Anyone would be, but can you be more specific? SG: To be honest, I just lost it. The red mist came down and I went berserk. NH: How do you mean berserk? SG You know - just really angry. I grabbed the first thing I saw. It was a stool and I smacked him with it. NH Do you think you were justified in doing this? SG No, it was out of order, but he'd really wound me up. NH: Where did you hit him? SG: I'm not sure but I was aiming at his sneering face. NH: The report I've got from the hospital is that he suffered a fractured skull. Do you accept that was caused when you attacked him with the stool? SG Yeah. NH: So what did you want to do when you attacked him? SG: I definitely didn't want to kill him if that's what you're getting at. I guess I just wanted to hurt him. NH: How badly did you want to hurt him? SG Pretty bad I suppose. NH: I can understand why he upset you but being upset is one thing, cracking someone over the head with a stool is another isn't it?

Tape times PARTICULARS OF INTERVIEW

7.50

SG: Yes, I know. It didn't help that my girlfriend, Martha, cheated on me with Jamie. He was supposed to be my best friend. NH: That must have made you particularly angry. SG: Yes, it did. NH: How long ago did this happen? SG: About two months ago, but I just can't get it out of my head even though we're no longer together. Every time I picture them having sex, it makes my blood boil. And, to make it worse, Jamie sent round a video of them at it to my phone. Everyone's laughing at me! NH: How did that make you feel? SG: Like a complete idiot. They've totally humiliated me - it really winds me up just to think about it. I thought Martha really liked me. NH: I can understand your feelings. But did this have an impact on you hitting Jamie? SG: I don't know. It all happened so fast. It definitely didn't help though. NH: Are you really asking me to believe that it wasn't on your mind? SG: I suppose it was - I've been planning to get back at Jamie for some time. NH: Okay, we'll finish the interview for now, as I can see you're getting distressed.

Extracts from audibly recorded interview of Dr Charles Ramsden:

Tape times PARTICULARS OF INTERVIEW

4.00

5

5.20

NH: What time did you come on duty today? CR: I was on the evening shift at the Accident and Emergency Department, so I started at 4pm. I was due to end my shift at midnight, so just after Jamie Stewart was admitted. NH: As I understand it this was your last shift of the week. How many hours had you worked this week? CR: 48 hours, which is the maximum we're allowed to work. I'd also been on call for 72 hours that week, which is also the maximum. NH: So how did you do feel? CR: I was tired, but that's par for the course in A&E. NH: What was it like in A&E yesterday evening? CR: It was very busy. Busier than usual for a Saturday evening. NH: How long have you been qualified? CR: I became a junior doctor earlier this year, so four months, I'm specialising in emergency medicine. NH: What did you do when you saw Jamie Stewart? CR: He was in cubicle 3. One of the nurses had already seen him. She told me that he'd been hit on the head. Apparently, he'd been brought in by some friends who were concerned about him. NH: So what did you do when you went into cubicle 3? CR: I checked his notes first. They reported that he'd suffered a blow to his head. NH: Did Jamie tell you how he'd received the blow? Presumably if your patient is conscious you'll try and get as much information from him about his injury? CR: Yes, that's normal. I was under the impression that he'd been punched to the head. I think that's what he told me, but I'm sorry to say that I can't be sure about that now. NH: The medical notes you refer to indicate that he'd received a heavy blow to his head by a stool or chair leg. I produce these as exhibit NH/1 [not attached]. It appears that entry was made before you saw Jamie Stewart, is that correct? For the benefit of the audio recording equipment, I'm now showing Dr Ramsden this entry on the notes. CR: Yes, I'm not sure how I missed that. NH: How did Jamie Stewart appear when you examined him?

6.10 CR: Surprisingly for the time of day he wasn't affected by drink. He also appeared to be coherent and wasn't complaining of any pain. I didn't believe he was suffering from concussion when I examined him. NH: What did you do to examine him? CR: I examined his eyes and also felt around his cranium. There was nothing to suggest that he'd suffered a fractured skull. No swelling or bruising or any pain. NH: So what did you do? CR: I prescribed some painkillers and then discharged him. NH: Had you been aware that he'd received a much heavier blow to his head, what else would you have done? CR: I would also have arranged for an X-ray to be taken. NH: Had this been done, is it possible that Jamie would have survived? CR: It's possible I suppose, but I think the autopsy will be able to give you a better idea about that.

Guidance: Ensure that you set out the actus reus and mens rea of the offence with supporting authority where relevant, and apply the facts to the law you have identified.