A Time to Kill by Joel Schumacher - Movie Review Example

Business Law: 'A Time to Kill' is a Joel Schumacher film released in the year 1996. The story is about a lawyer and his assistant trying to save a father, who is on trial for murder. Carl Lee Hailey is a poor farmer. His ten year old daughter is kidnapped and raped by two white men. When the case appears in the trial court, he shows up and shoots the two defendants dead. He is charged with murder offence. He is sure to get a death penalty. But a young lawyer named Jake Brigance comes to his rescue and defends Carl Lee, while racial violence is in fermenting all over. This movie is an adaptation of the famous crime novel of John Grisham, carrying the same name. When this movie is analyzed within the frame of British laws, it is seen that it gives us a clear picture of murder with an intention to kill. Here, the act committed is a criminal offence. The father of the raped victim killed the two rapists, thereby committing murder. Sir Edward Coke CJ, 1597 defines murder as: "Murder is when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day after the same." Let us consider this movie with respect to the above definition. If an act done is to be brought within the purview of a criminal offence it must have the following basic elements: A murder has two parts within the jurisdictions of common law. They are: 1. The act actus reus (Lord Lane, C.J. in R v Nedrick [1986] 1 WLR 1025) of killing a person 2. The state of mind mens rea (Gammon Ltd v Attorney General of Hong Kong,1985) of intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or wanton. Murder is considered as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought. English law defines murder as: "The unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's Peace, with malice aforethought" Actus Reus: (Lord Lane, C.J. in R v Nedrick [1986] 1 WLR 1025) Therefore, a murder can be termed as a criminal act when it carries the first element, i.e., actus reus. "A useful working definition (of actus reus) is that it comprises all the elements of the definition of the offence except those that relate to the mental element (mens rea) required on the part of the accused." (Allen; p.18) The actus reus of murder requires that a person is killed unlawfully under the Queen's peace. Queen's Peace - in times of peace rather than war time. Unlawful - that there is no lawful excuse or justification. Person means a human being. Lord Lane, C.J. in R v Nedrick [1986] 1 WLR 1025, states: "Where the charge is murder and in the rare cases where the simple direction is not enough, the jury should be directed that they are not entitled to infer the necessary intention, unless they feel sure that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty (barring some unforeseen intervention) as a result of the defendant's actions and that the defendant appreciated that such was the case, the decision being for the jury to decide on a consideration of all the evidence." Mens rea: (Gammon Ltd v Attorney General of Hong Kong, 1985) The above case was decided as: "In their Lordships' opinion, the law relevant to this appeal may be stated in the following propositions: (1) There is a presumption of law that mens rea is required before a person can be guilty of a criminal offence (2) The presumption is particularly strong where the offence is truly criminal in character; (3) The presumption applies to statutory offences, and can be displaced only if this is clearly or by necessary implication the effect of the statute; (4) The only situation in which the presumption can be displaced is where the statute is concerned with an issue of social concern, and public safety is such an issue; (5) Even where a statute is concerned with such an issue, the presumption of mens rea stands unless it can be shown that the creation of strict liability will be effective to promote the objects of the statute by encouraging greater vigilance to prevent the commission of the prohibited act." Which court will this case go to The crime committed in the movie is an intentional murder and as such it will be put to trial in the Crown court. According to UK laws, criminal offences like murder, rape, robbery etc are dealt in Crown Court. Reference: Meredith D, R 1991, Murder by Reference, Ballantine Books (Mm) Read More