Hyam v DPP [1975] AC 55<\/strong><\/p>\n Murder \u2013 Mens Rea \u2013 Intention \u2013 Foresight<\/p>\n The defendant Hyam had been in a relationship with a man before the relationship ended.\u00a0 Hyam then had become jealous of her ex-boyfriend\u2019s new fianc\u00e9e Ms Booth.\u00a0 She poured petrol through Booth\u2019s letter box and then ignited it using a rolled up newspaper.\u00a0 Hyam did not warn anyone of the fire but simply drove home.\u00a0 The resulting fire killed two young children.\u00a0 Hyam was tried for murder.\u00a0 At trial she claimed that she had only intended to frighten Booth and had not intended to kill anyone as the mens rea <\/em>of murder demanded.\u00a0 Hyam was convicted and appealed.\u00a0 The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal to the House of Lords.<\/p>\n Did Hyam have the requisite intention to commit murder?\u00a0 Did the mens rea <\/em>of intention require an intention to kill or only a foresight of a serious risk of death or serious bodily harm being caused?<\/p>\n The appeal was refused.\u00a0 A person had the requisite mens rea for murder if they knowingly committed an act which was aimed at someone and which was committed with the intention of causing death or serious injury.\u00a0 Lord Hailsham also held that intention could also exist where the defendant \u2018knew there was a serious risk that death or serious bodily harm will ensure from his acts and he commits those acts deliberately and without lawful excuse with the intention to expose a potential victim to that risk as the result of those acts.\u00a0 It does not matter in such circumstances whether the defendant desires those consequences or not.\u2019 Hyam v DPP [1975] AC 55 at 79.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The defendant Hyam had been in a relationship with a man before the relationship ended.\u00a0 Hyam then had become jealous of her ex-boyfriend\u2019s new fianc\u00e9e Ms Booth.\u00a0 She poured petrol through Booth\u2019s letter box and then ignited it using a rolled up newspaper.\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[85],"class_list":["post-5799","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cases","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nFacts of Hyamm v DPP<\/h3>\n
Issues in Hyamm v DPP<\/h3>\n
Decision \/ Outcome of Hyamm v DPP<\/h3>\n