The position regarding omissions for actual offences is generally relatively straightforward. In the United Kingdom, the legal position is that **murder** can be committed by omission in exceptional circumstances. 

> For example, in the case of *R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918) 13 Cr App R 134*, the legal guardians of a child who starved to death were convicted of murder by making an omission as they had an established special relationship to the child (and therefore legal a duty of care). 

However, the position seems much less clear to me on the subject of **attempted offences**. 

If, for example, the facts were the same as in the above case, but the child had been saved before dying. Would it be possible for this omission to constitute **attempted murder**? 

I am not aware of any case law on this issue so it isn't clear to me what the position of the courts would be in a situation like the above and on omissions more generally when it comes to attempted offences. 


----------

**Edit:** In light of the recent answer, I want to post a small clarification about what this question is looking for. This is not a question about the general law on when omissions can lead to criminal liability. I am interested in answers that specifically explore the law as it relates to **attempts** and whether or not these fall within the scope of the exceptions that allow for criminal liability to arise out of omissions. This will likely have to make at least some reference to the **Criminal Attempts Act 1981**  alongside either case law or academic commentary to adequately answer the question.