TNAG-0604-FCO40-752-Capital-punishment-in-Dependent-Territories-1977 — Page 121

to say is that this was

-78-

an unlawful killing neither

justifiable nor excusable and that the creature was

reasonable creature in being, that Evelyn Rabsatt was

well up to the very day they saw her watering her garden.

With malice aforethought.

Malice is the formation

of the intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily

harm, and the aforethought indicates that there must be

some sort of foresight that death would or might result;

and this malice aforethought may be either expressed or

implied well in this case Members of the Jury, the

expressed malice will mean if it is perfectly clear the

accused stated it and you got it in the evidence that he

intended to go and do this; or implied, where a deliberate

and cruel act committed by one person against another

would obviously have resulted in gricvous bodily harm

or death so its implied.

Now if you are satisfied that when the accused did

the act, he knew that it was highly probable that it would

cause death or serious bodily harm, then the prosecution

will have proved death as a result of a voluntary act,

unlawfully killing. The prosecution has to prove the

malice the criminal intent. On the other hand, the

Defence can show that the offence does not amount to

murder, because there was not that criminal intent. The

Defence can show that the killing was provoked.

a final definition

bodily harm.

5

10

15

20

And as

grievous bodily harm means serious

25

Now then, you now will have to apply the facts to

the law to see if you are satisfied or not, and you have

to look at every ingredient, every little element in the

charge, because if the Crown fails with respect to any