The Poisoned Apple of Malice

UTSePress Research/Manakin Repository

Search UTSePress Research


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Crofts, Penny en_US
dc.contributor.editor en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2014-05-04T18:06:10Z
dc.date.available 2014-05-04T18:06:10Z
dc.date.issued 2013 en_US
dc.identifier 2013001640 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Crofts, Penelope 2013, 'The Poisoned Apple of Malice', Griffith Law Review, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 150-179. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1038-3441 en_US
dc.identifier.other C1 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10453/27840
dc.description.abstract Contemporary criminal law tends to regard malice through the lens of act, intention and consequence. I argue that this modern reading of malice through contemporary patterns of blameworthiness is a misreading, and loses alternative (legal) ways of organising wickedness. Historical accounts of malice can and should be regarded as a (legal) resource by which to critique and enrich modern accounts of blameworthiness. To this end, I explore the construction of malice as a cogent, resonant concept of legal wickedness by treatise writers in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries. Treatise writers aimed to ensure that malice was sufficiently broad and malleable so that wickedness would not escape the law. Saunders' case was integral to the construction of malice, and it was used by treatise writers to claim and demonstrate the malleability of malice. Saunders had malice because he caused the death of a subject of the Queen, with premeditation and through the uncanny act of poisoning. The slippage across modern patterns of blameworthiness should not be regarded as a failure to settle upon a pure definition of malice, but as integral to the function of malice to persuade that wickedness would not escape the law. en_US
dc.language en_US
dc.publisher Griffith University en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon NA en_US
dc.title The Poisoned Apple of Malice en_US
dc.parent Griffith Law Review en_US
dc.journal.volume 22 en_US
dc.journal.number 1 en_US
dc.publocation Australia en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 150 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 179 en_US
dc.cauo.name LAW.Faculty of law en_US
dc.conference Verified OK en_US
dc.for 180122 en_US
dc.personcode 950579 en_US
dc.percentage 100 en_US
dc.classification.name Legal Theory, Jurisprudence and Legal Interpretation en_US
dc.classification.type FOR-08 en_US
dc.edition 2009 en_US
dc.custom en_US
dc.date.activity en_US
dc.location.activity en_US
dc.description.keywords legal theory wickedness criminal law malice transferred malice murder en_US
dc.staffid 950579 en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record