Constructive Manslaughter

Question 1

There must have been an unlawful positive criminal act

Answer 1

D must have committed a crime and that this resulted in death

Question 2

Case that states the unlawful act must be criminal not civil

Answer 2

R v Franklin (threw a box off Brighton pier and hit a swimmer below who died)

Question 3

Case which shows there must be a criminal act if there is not a criminal act there is not IM

Answer 3

R v lamb :shot his friend with a revolver both failed to realise that it would actually shoot.
Case shows v must apprehend

Question 4

Case where there was an unlawful criminal act that lead to IM

Answer 4

R v Larkin:
Larkin threatened a man with a razor blade at a party, girlfriend of the man fell onto the blade and died
Larkin had committed a assault that led to death

Question 5

What does r v Lowe state

Answer 5

An omission is not available for constructive manslaughter

Neglected child which caused death

Question 6

Case which states the act need not be aimed at the victim

Answer 6

R v Mitchell :

Pushing in post office

Question 7

Case that indicates the act can be aimed at property

Answer 7

R v goodfellow

Firebombed house hoping to be rehoused by council, his family was inside and died

Question 8

What are the three tests that must be satisfied

Answer 8

1) there must be an unlawful positive criminal act
2) the act must have caused the death
3) the act must also have been a dangerous one

Question 9

The unlawful positive criminal act must have caused the death so the rules of what apply

Answer 9

Causation

Question 10

The act need not be the sole cause of death but

Answer 10

As long as it significantly contributed to it

Question 11

Where is the problem with drugs cases and causation

Answer 11

When d supplies v with an illegal drug, V self injects is this an NAI?

Question 12

Cato facts and outcome

Answer 12

Cato caused death

D prepared drugs andInjected each other. Committed unlawful act of administering a noxious substance that caused death

Question 13

Year of Cato

Answer 13

1976

Question 14

Dalby facts and outcome

Answer 14

Dalby didn’t cause death

D supplied drugs but v injects. The injection caused death not the supplying there is an NAI

Question 15

Year of Dalby

Answer 15

1982

Question 16

Facts if Dias and outcome

Answer 16

Dias didn’t cause death
D prepared syringe. V injected and d injected themselves. V was ill and died
Conviction quashed

Question 17

Date of Dias

Answer 17

2002

Question 18

R Rogers facts and outcome

Answer 18

Rogers didn’t cause death but confusion
D applied tourniquet to vs arm but v self injects
H of l indicated decision in R v Rogers was incorrect. He did not cause death and over turned ruling

Question 19

Date r v Rogers

Answer 19

2003

Question 20

Facts and outcome of r v Kennedy

Answer 20

Did not cause death
D prepared injection and handed it to v. Who self injected.
C of a said d’s participating actions had caused death
H of l over ruled as d had not carried out an unlawful act as had no administered a noxious substance under s23 of OAPA

Question 21

Date of Kennedy

Answer 21

2007

Question 22

Case that causes confusion in drugs

Answer 22

MacAngus & Kane v HM advocate which is a Scottish case therefore persuasive

Question 23

Legal principle I’m MacAngus & Kane v HM Advocate

Answer 23

Vs self injection of drugs supplied by d does not necessarily break the chain of causation

Question 24

2nd element of CM

Answer 24

The act must have been a dangerous one, in that it must have been an act that was likely to injure someone

Question 25

The test to whether a criminal act is as decided in which case

Answer 25

Objective: r v church

Question 26

Case facts of r v church

Answer 26

Church knocked a woman out and believed she was dead threw her in the river where she drowned, the reasonable man would realise this is dangerous

Question 27

The resulting harm does not have to be serious but

Answer 27

Reasonable person would recognise that he unlawful act must subject the victim to at leaf some harm even if it was not serious harm (JM and SM)

Question 28

Legal principle Dawson and others and orbiter

Answer 28

Act was not dangerous; causing fear was insufficient because d could not have been aware that f had a weak heart so the act was not dangerous
Clarified harm, frightening or shocking- psychological harm to v is insufficient, the shock must cause physical harm

Question 29

Dawson’s and others case facts

Answer 29

D and another carried out an armed robbery of a petrol station whilst masked and armed with a pick axe and replica gun, V was 60 and had a heart condition and suffered a heart attack

Question 30

R v Watson legal principle

Answer 30

Act was dangerous because of an obvious frailty

Question 31

Case facts of r v Watson

Answer 31

Threw a brick thought window at victims house and verbally assaulted. 89 died from heart attack

Question 32

Was Watson conviction held on appeal

Answer 32

No because it could not be certain that he actually caused the death

Question 33

Legal principle and facts of Bristow, Dunn and delay

Answer 33

6 men planned to rob workshop with vans, v was found dead and it was decided he had been hit by one or both of the vehicles
To a reasonable person the robbery had a risk of some harm

Question 34

Cases to further demonstrate dangerous act regarding one punch CM

Answer 34

Carey and others
Lynch
Furby

Question 35

Carey and others legal principle and facts

Answer 35

Not a dangerous act
V was punched one and died, the punch was not dangerous because the reasonable person would not have foreseen physical harm

Question 36

Lynch

Legal principle and facts

Answer 36

D had punched v several times, v also had a unknown Heart defect battery was dangerous because multiple punches are likely to result in some physical harm even if v didn’t have a heart condition

Question 37

Furby

Legal principle and facts

Answer 37

One punch manslaughter
D and v were good friends, court regarded punch as an explicable reaction when d punched v with moderate force
D was convicted