Tom was a 75 years old retired law professor and the author of several books on criminal law. He was widowed and childless. He was diabetic and needed daily doses of insulin. He suffered from early-onset dementia and normal communication with him had become effectively impossible. He was also dying in pain from cancer of the bowel and other internal organs. Morphine and other painkillers were no longer effective.  He had been hospitalised, bed-ridden, for some time and was given a private room because of the disturbing effect of his shouting and screaming on other patients. Doctors were sure he would die within the next few months.

Tom was being treated by Dr Dick, who was an old friend. In Tom's younger years, when he still had full mental faculties, he had often expressed to Dick his belief in the value of voluntary euthanasia and his own willingness to undergo it if he was terminally ill and in pain or had lost his mental faculties. He had said: "They shoot horses, don't they? If the need arises, just give me something lethal. I won't want to live a useless or humiliating life." 

Dr Dick eventually decided to stop the insulin injections. He also administered heavy doses of sedatives and painkillers which, although not totally effective, did ease the pain. Tom died a week later from the effects of the withdrawal of insulin in his weakened condition.

When questioned by the police, Dr Dick admitted that he knew that Tom could die without the insulin. He said: "He was going to die anyway. He just wanted the pain to end."

1. Did Dr Dick cause the death of Tom?
2. Was Dr Dick reckless with respect to causing the death of Tom?
3. Did Dr Dick intend to cause the death of Tom?

 

 

Notes.

Accept the facts as stated. These facts will constitute the evidence in the case. Your answers should: (1) identify the issues a court will need to address; (2) identify the law relevant to the issues; and (3) analyse the evidence in light of the law of your jurisdiction. 

 

In identifying the relevant law, start with the statutory provisions. Case law is to be used to interpret the statutory provisions or to fill in gaps.

 

In analyzing the evidence, aim for reasoned arguments about how the relevant statutory provisions and propositions from the cases apply to the facts of the problem. Your primary job as a lawyer is to identify the arguments that might be made on each side and put them in their strongest form. If you think that the arguments on one side are stronger than those on the other side, say so and explain why.  However, do not assume that there is a 'right answer'.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Issues The court will need to address the following issues Did Dr Dick cause the death of Tom Was Dr Dick reckless with respect to causing the death o... View the full answer