The assignment aims to analyze a case of attempted murder critically. The case presented involves Patrice, who intended to kill her mother in law. However, he missed and ended up killing another person who was behind his mother in law in the process. Patrice then attempted to fire again, though the rifle jammed, and he ran off. While in court, Patrice’s attorney argued that Kayla could not have been killed due to the rifle’s malfunctioning.
Was the Court correct in dismissing the attempted murder charge?
No.
The Court should not have dismissed the attempted murder charge since there is sufficient justification to prove the following elements:
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Intent
Proving intent as an element requires evidence showing that the defendant purposed to kill, as evidenced by a reckless or indifference action towards another human life, thereby proving a real possibility of another person being killed (Lumen Learning, 2020). From the above, it is evident that Patrice intended to kill her mother in law, Kayla, since he had brandished a gun and fired it towards her direction. However, the fact that he missed doesn’t invalidate this intention since he ended up killing another person. The same applies for the second attempt, in which the gun jammed.
Action/ Criminal Act
Consistent with the above, dismissal of an attempted murder charge can occur if the prosecution fails to prove that there was no direct action aimed at committing the crime (Lumen Learning, 2020). For instance, having a thought or even a casual conversation about purchasing a gun or murdering another person is not sufficient to prove a direct step aimed at murdering. In the scenario under consideration, it is evident that Patrice’s action of brandishing a gun and shooting with the aim of killing her mother-in-law suffices as a direct step.
Concurrence of Intent and Criminal Act
Concurrence occurs when a person plans to commit murder and acts as planned (Lumen Learning, 2020). From the case scenario, it is noted that there was concurrence of intent and criminal act since Patrice was armed and even shot at his mother in law, only that he missed.
An analysis of the three elements highlighted above reveals that intent was complete while the criminal act and concurrence were incomplete. That notwithstanding, these three elements highlighted above provide sufficient reasons why the court should not have dismissed the murder charges.
Apart from that, the common legal defenses to attempted murder cannot provide sufficient justification which the court can consider in dismissing the attempted murder charges, as discussed below:
Impossibility
Though impossibility is a common legal defense, it is often controversial. A scenario is considered an impossibility if even when the defendant would have proceeded with his/her plans, murder would not have occurred (Erwing, n.d.). An example is if a bomb malfunctioned in the middle of an attack, or this case, a rifle jams. From the scenario under consideration, this could be a possible reason why the court could consider dismissing the attempted murder charges.
Self-Defense
Self-defense is another possible reason why a case of attempted murder may be discredited (“Criminal Law,” 2020). For instance, if person A wanted to kill person B, though the latter ends up killing the former, it cannot constitute a case of attempted murder.
Renunciation
Renunciation occurs when an individual who had intended to commit murder changes his/her mind in the process, and with sufficient justification, the said person can be exempted from murder charges.
Lack of Intent
From the case scenario, there is sufficient evidence that indeed Patrice intended to kill her mother in law since he had a loaded gun and even attempted to shoot her, though he missed. Therefore, this legal defense cannot be admissible.
Ethical and moralistic concerns of legal defense such as impossibility
An impossibility defense is used in cases where there is a failure in an attempt to commit a criminal act. Factual impossibility occurs when the defendant is unaware of the crime’s impossibility to be committed, for instance, due to unplanned technical failures (Erwing, n.d.). On the other hand, a legal impossibility can occur when a defendant completed all the intended criminal procedures, though it did not yield the desired result.
The ethical and moralistic concern of impossibility is that it insulates a person who intended to commit a crime from being prosecuted (Erwing, n.d.). In simpler terms, merely trying to commit a crime should not be considered a criminal offense. However, this argument is often contradictory since such persons can as well be considered guilty. For instance, a suicide bomber who tries to bomb an entire city, but the explosive device fails to detonate, can be defended by impossibility. Similarly, in the case scenario under consideration, the fact that Patrice did not kill her mother in law due to missing the first shot and the gun’s failure to fire on the second attempt can be considered for impossibility as a legal defense.
A critical evaluation of these two instances brings to question the morality and ethics of impossibility as a legal defense since both persons above may be exonerated from their attempted criminal acts. However, these persons had already proven their intention to commit a crime, and by releasing them, it poses a risk to the public. In Patrice’s case, dismissing the murder attempt and subsequently releasing him to the public poses a danger to his mother in law, since it is impossible to completely rule out the fact that he might try shooting her again. Apart from that, the fact that he killed someone else in the process and released in the pretext of legal impossibility should be sufficient grounds upon which he can be convicted.
References
Criminal Law. (2020). 4.1 Criminal Elements. Retrieved 23 October 2020, from https://open.lib.umn.edu/criminallaw/chapter/4-1-criminal-elements/#:~:text=The%20elements%20of%20a%20crime%20are%20criminal%20act%2C%20criminal%20intent,%2C%20harm%2C%20and%20attendant%20circumstances .
Erwing, H. A. (n.d.). Impossibility as a Defense to Criminal Attempt. Sw. LJ , 17 , 461.
Lumen Learning. (2020). 4.1 Criminal Elements | Criminal Law. Retrieved 23 October 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-criminallaw/chapter/4-1-criminal-elements/
