Diminished Responsibility

Question 1

Set out in

Answer 1

Coroners and Justice Act 2009

Question 2

If successful?

Answer 2

Allows defendant to be guilty of manslaughter rather than murder.

Question 3

What crime does it only apply to?

Answer 3

Murder

Question 4

1. Abnormality of mental function

Answer 4

(R v Byrne) “abnormality of the mind”
“a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal”

Jury make the decision based on evidence given by professionals - unlikely to disagree.

Question 5

2. Recognised medical condition

Answer 5

(R v Gittens) - depression
(R v Inglis) - bipolar
(R v Suttcliffe) - schizophrenia

(R v Bunch) - alcoholism can qualify but must be a link between intoxication and mental functioning

Question 6

3. Substantial impairment

Answer 6

Impaired ability to:
1. Understand nature of their conduct
2. Form rational judgement
3. Exercise self control.

(R v Golds) - judges should refuse to offer any further explanation or give a direction in terms of
(R v Simcox) ‘do we think, looking at it broadly as common sense people, there was a substantial impairment of his mental responsibility in what he did?

Question 7

Causal

Answer 7

Causal connection between D’s abnormality and D’s act/omission in the killing.

Question 8

Burden of Proof

Answer 8

S2 Homicide Act
Balance of probabilties (50.1%)

Question 9

Intoxication

Answer 9

(R v Dietschmann)
If D was intoxicated, a jury had to decide whether DESPITE the intoxication, D’s abnormality of mind substantially impaired his mental responsibility for the killing.