## Facts

- Mitchell, during a dispute while queuing at a post office, pushed an elderly man.
- The elderly man fell into an elderly woman, who was frail.
- The woman sustained injuries from the fall and subsequently died.
- Mitchell was convicted of manslaughter as a result of the woman's death.

## Issues

1. Whether the doctrine of transferred malice could apply when the defendant's unlawful act, intended for one person, resulted in harm to another.
2. Whether the chain of causation between Mitchell's push and the woman's death was broken by the intervening actions of the elderly man.
3. Whether the guilty mind (mens rea) for the intended crime could transfer to the actual crime committed.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal upheld Mitchell’s conviction for manslaughter.
- The court held that transferred malice applied because the unlawful assault directed at one person resulted in the same type of crime against another.
- The court determined that the chain of causation was not broken by the elderly man's fall into the woman; Mitchell's initial act remained the direct cause of the woman's death.
- The guilty mind for the assault on the man was transferred to the resulting harm caused to the woman.

## Legal Principles

- Transferred malice operates where the mens rea for one offence intended against one person is applied to the unintended same offence caused to another.
- The rule requires the actual crime to be the same as the intended crime; it does not apply if the nature of the crime changes.
- Causation is maintained where the resulting harm to the unintended victim is a likely consequence of the defendant’s initial act.
- The causal link is not interrupted simply because another individual is involved in transmitting the harm, provided the sequence of events is a probable outcome of the original act.

## Conclusion

R v Mitchell clarified that transferred malice applies in cases where the same crime intended against one individual results in harm to another, as long as causation is direct and uninterrupted. The case remains an important authority for the operation and limits of transferred malice in English criminal law.


R v Mitchell [1983] QB 741