The Queen v Whittington

The case of *The Queen v Whittington* concerned charges of manslaughter and dangerous act. The prosecution alleged that the defendant fired four shots in quick succession, one of which caused the death of the victim. A central difficulty for the Crown was its inability to identify which specific shot was the fatal one. The defendant sought to raise the defence of authorisation.

The legal issues before the court were whether the indictment was bad for latent duplicity, given the uncertainty as to which of the four shots constituted the dangerous act or the act causing death. The court also had to determine whether the Crown was obliged to provide particulars of why the act in question was not authorised, in circumstances where the defendant intended to raise authorisation as a defence.

The court held that the indictment was not bad for latent duplicity. It reasoned that the four shots fired in quick succession could properly be considered a single act for the purposes of the charges. The court applied principles established in cases concerning the nature of a single act for criminal liability, particularly where a series of actions are closely connected in time and intent. Regarding the particulars of authorisation, the court found that the Crown was not obliged to provide such particulars. The onus remained on the defendant to establish the defence of authorisation, and the Crown was not required to anticipate and negate every possible basis for such a defence in the indictment.

The court dismissed the appeal.