Redefining Murder: Joint Enterprise
| dc.contributor.author | Mitchell-Rodd, Nicola | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-03-28T14:42:15Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-11T11:27:00Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-03-28T14:42:15Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-04-11T11:27:00Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
| dc.identifier.citation |
Mitchell-Rodd, N. (2013) 'Redefining Murder: Joint Enterprise', Plymouth Law and Criminal Justice Review, 5, pp. 110-130. Available at: https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/handle/10026.1/8992 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.issn | 2054-149X | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/8992 | |
| dc.description.abstract |
This article explores the evolution of secondary liability and the unforgiving doctrine of joint enterprise in homicide cases. Exploration of the current law ensues to determine if the distinct decisions of their Lordships in both Powell and Rahman have failed to sufficiently clarify the law; followed by in depth analysis of the Law Commission and Ministry of Justice proposals to reform this infamously disputed area of law. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | University of Plymouth | |
| dc.rights | Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) | * |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | * |
| dc.subject | secondary liability | en_US |
| dc.subject | joint enterprise | en_US |
| dc.subject | murder | en_US |
| dc.subject | manslaughter | en_US |
| dc.subject | reform | en_US |
| dc.title | Redefining Murder: Joint Enterprise | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | |
| plymouth.volume | 5 | |
| plymouth.journal | The Plymouth Law & Criminal Justice Review |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)