R v Gnango

Ratio Decidendi

Fakty

Gnango and another man, known only as 'Bandana Man', got into a gunfight with each other in and around a car park in South London, each shooting at the other with intent to kill or cause serious harm. A bullet fired by Bandana Man missed Gnango and struck and killed an innocent passer-by, Magda Pniewska, a care worker crossing the car park. Bandana Man was never identified or caught; Gnango was prosecuted for her murder even though he did not fire the fatal shot.

Podsumowanie orzeczenia

The Supreme Court held, by a majority (6–1), that Gnango was guilty of the murder of the passer-by, even though the fatal shot was fired by the other gunman. By voluntarily engaging in a planned gunfight in which each intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to the other, Gnango and Bandana Man were in effect engaged in a joint criminal enterprise of shooting at each other; Gnango aided and abetted Bandana Man's attempt to shoot at him, and the doctrine of transferred malice carried the intention across from the intended victim (Gnango himself) to the actual victim. The majority reasoned variously that Gnango was a principal to an agreed affray or a secondary party who encouraged the very act that killed the bystander. The result — that a person can be convicted of murder for a death caused by the very man who was trying to kill him — was controversial and criticised, but reflected the policy of holding both participants in a lethal gun battle responsible for its foreseeable fatal consequences to bystanders. Lord Kerr dissented.

Kluczowe cytaty

Późniejsze zastosowanie