Diminished Responsibility Flashcards

1
Q

What is the act and section number for diminished responsibility?

A

Section 52 Coroners and Justices Act 2009

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What act did s.52 Coroners and Justices Act 2009 amend?

A

Section 2 Homicide Act 1957

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the definition for diminished responsibility?

A

“Where a person who kills or is a party to a killing, is not to be convicted of murder if that person was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the case for abnormality of mental functioning?

A

R vs Fairweather

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the POL from R vs Fairweather?

A

The jury didn’t think he was psychotic at the time of the attacks so the defence was rejected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the POL from R vs Byrne?

A

The defence covers all activities of the mind, including the ability to exercise willpower

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the case that states that the defence covers all activities of the mind, including the ability to exercise willpower?

A

R vs Byrne

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the case for recognised medical condition?

A

R vs Martin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is the POL from R vs Martin?

A

He had paranoid personality disorder and depression so he could use the defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the POL from R vs Brennan?

A

If 2 doctors agree on the recognised medical condition, then murder has to be withdrawn from the jury

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What case states that if 2 doctors agree on the recognised medical condition, then murder has to be withdrawn from the jury?

A

R vs Brennan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is a substantial impairment and what does it have to impair?

A

A substantial impairment stops the defendant to do one of the following:

  1. Understand the nature of their conduct
  2. To form a rational judgement (R vs Martin)
  3. To exercise self-control (R vs Byrne)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the POL from R vs Brown

A

The impairment must be substantial and not partial
Abnormality needs to be more than a minimal or trivial contribution to the killing, but it doesn’t have to be the sole cause

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the case that states - The impairment must be substantial and not partial

A

R vs Brown

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What case was R vs Brown confirmed by?

A

R vs Simcox

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What did R vs Simcox state?

A

That the impairment cannot be that it just made it harder for the defendant to control themselves

17
Q

What is the final point that must be proven for DR?

A

The medical condition must provide an explanation for the defendants actions

18
Q

What is the case for explanation of the defendant’s conduct?

A

R vs Osbourne

19
Q

What is the POL from R vs Osbourne?

A

The drug taking and anger was the explanation for the conduct and not ADHD

20
Q

What else do you have to include under explanation for D’s actions?

A

Factual causation

21
Q

What is the case for factual causation?

A

R vs White

22
Q

What is the test for factual causation that comes from R vs White?

A

‘But for’ test

23
Q

What is the POL from R vs White?

A

‘But for’ him putting poison in his mother’s drink, she would’ve died anyway of a heart attack

24
Q

What is the POL from R vs Deitschmann?

A

The abnormality of the mind could still have been a substantial cause of the killing but not the intoxication

25
What case states - The abnormality of the mind could still have been a substantial cause of the killing but not the intoxication
R vs Dietschmann
26
What is the ruling on alcohol dependency syndrome?
The jury must only take into account the alcohol drunk in order to satisfy the dependency
27
What is the POL from R vs Wood?
The defendant was suffering from alcohol dependency syndrome which was confirmed by 4 psychiatrists and is a recognised medical condition
28
What case states - The defendant was suffering from alcohol dependency syndrome which was confirmed by 4 psychiatrists and is a recognised medical condition
R vs Wood
29
What is the POL from R vs Dowds?
Although acute intoxication is a recognised medical condition, it does not arise a defence of DR due to it being voluntary
30
What case stated that although acute intoxication is a recognised medical condition, it does not arise a defence of DR due to it being voluntary?
R vs Dowds
31
What is the POL from R vs Joyce and Another?
If the abnormality of mental functioning arises from voluntary intoxication alone then it is not viable for DR
32
What case states if the abnormality of mental functioning arises from voluntary intoxication alone then it is not viable for DR?
R vs Joyce and Another