Motive: Does it Matter Why the Victim was Murdered?
What was the motive? is asked in virtually all crime shows. Theres a body, the death looks suspicious, and the detectives search for why the person was murdered. But is the prosecution in NSW actually required to prove the accused had a motive to murder the victim? In a word: no.
Under s 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), a murder has been committed when the accused has caused the death of another person and the act or omission causing death involved:
reckless indifference to human life; or
an intent to kill; or
an intent to inflict grievous bodily harm; or
the commission a crime punishable by imprisonment for 25 years or life imprisonment.
The prosecution is required to prove a certain mental state existed, but this does not necessarily exist to proving a motive. In other words, the court does not need to know why the victim was murdered.
Reckless Indifference
For a homicide to be committed with reckless indifference to human life, the accused needs to have foreseen that it was probable not just possible that death would result from their act or omission (Crabbe v R (1985) 156 CLR 464; Royall v R (1991) 172 CLR 378). This is a subjective test, meaning that it is necessary that the accused, and not merely an ordinary or reasonable person, foresaw that death was probable (Pemble v R (1971) 124 CLR 107).
So, while the state of mind of the accused needs to be proven, no motive is needed to establish murder by reckless indifference to human life.
https://www.timebase.com.au/news/2017/AT04143-article.html