Defences To Murder Flashcards
What are the two specific partial defences to murder?
Loss of Control
Diminished Responsibility
What legislation sets out the defence of diminished responsibility?
It was first introduced in the Homicide Act 1957, now amended by S.52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009
What is the definition of Diminished responsibility?
An abnormality of mental functioning which:
(a) arose from a recognised medical condition
(b) substantially impaired D’s ability to-
(i) understand the nature of his conduct, or
(ii) form a rational judgement, or
(iii) exercise self-control
(c) provides an explanation for D’s acts and omissions in doing or being party to the killing
‘Abnormality of mental functioning’
Amended definition from the Homicide Act ‘abnormality of mind’
R v Byrne - ‘A state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal’
‘Recognised medical condition’
Sexual psychopathy - R v Byrne PTSD - R v Blackman ADS - R v Tandy Depression - R v Gittens Paranoia - R v Martin It also covers any physical condition which affects mental functioning
What does substantially impaired mean?
R v Lloyd - substantial does not mean total, nor does it mean less than trivial or minimal impairment, it is something in between
(i) ‘To understand the nature of his conduct’
D is in an automatic state and does not know what he is doing
(ii) ‘to form a rational judgement’
D knows the nature of what he is doing but lacks an ability to form a rational judgement as a result of mental functioning.
R v Blackman - Constant stress from battle rendered him unable to form a rational judgment
(iii) ‘to exercise self-control’
R v Dietschmann - suffering from grief depression reaction to his aunt’s death, meant he could not exercise self-control when the watch she gave him was smashed
(c) ‘explains D’s conduct’
This part of the defence is explained in S.2(1B) of the Homicide Act 1957.
D has to prove that the abnormality of mental functioning provides an explanation for his act. A new principle introduced. The abnormality of mental functioning need not be the only factor causing D to Kill.
What legislation sets out the defence of Loss of Control?
This defence was introduced under S.54 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 replacing the defence or provocation which provided no protection for domestic abuse victims.
What is the definition of the defence of Loss of Control?
- D must have lost self-control
- there must be a qualifying trigger
- A person of the same sex and age with a reasonable amount of tolerance and self-restraint would have reacted in the same way as D in the same circumstances
‘Loss of self-control’
Under the old defence of provocation the loss of control had to be sudden and temporary. S.54(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 states a loss of self-control does not have to be sudden. Prompted by the case of R v Ahluwalia.
what are the two qualifying triggers?
Fear and anger
Explain the fear trigger
S.55(3) - Fear trigger - D’s fear of serious violence from V and so he acts.
R v Ward - where D feared violence on his brother so he hit the victim.
When the defendant incited the situation he cannot rely on the fear trigger - R v Dawes, R v Hatter
