Diminished Responsibility Flashcards
r v byrne
FACTS
Abnormality of mental functioning:
The defendant murdered a young girl staying in a hostel then he mutilated her body. He did so as he was suffering from irresistible impulses, he was unable to control
r v byrne
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
Abnormality of mental functioning:
Abnormality of mental functioning is define as a state of mind so different from that of a ordinary human being that a reasonable man would term it abnormal
Psychopathy
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v byrne
Paranoia
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v martin
Epilepsy
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v campbell
Depression
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v seers and r v gittens
Pre menstrual tensions
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v smith
Postnatal depression
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v reynolds
PTSD
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v bradley
asperger’s syndrome
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v reynolds
Battered woman syndrome
RECOGNISED MEDICAL CONDITION:
r v ahluwalia
r v grey
The defendant was a passenger on a train which crashed due to the defendant’s negligence he suffered PTSD due to this this caused his personality to change. Later someone walked in front of his car which billed them
r v sutcliffe
Religious delusions- not accepted he killed women because he said goo told him to
r v wood
FACTS
The defendant was an alcoholic got very drunk and killed the victimina frenzied attack with a meat cleave, involuntary drinking was enough for diminished responsibility
r v wood
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
Alchol dependency syndrome: if the defendant has an addiction and cannot stop himself from drinking then it is classed involuntary aiming and this is classed as an abnormality of the mind
r v golds
FACTS
The defendant killed his partner and admitted the killing. Medical evidence showed he had an abnormality of the mind from a medical condition. The issue was whether he was in a psychotic state at the the time of willing which substantially impaired his mind
r v golds
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
If asked the judge must direct the jury substantial doesn’t mean trivial or minimal non does it mean total, but something in between
r v dietschmann
FACTS
A man with an adjustinant disorder who was grieving for a recently deceased relative killed the victim whilst drunk
r v dietschmann
LEGAL PRINCIPLE
The question for the jury was if the defendant satisfied that despite the drink his mental abnormality substantially impaired his responsibility for the willing of the victim
