Diminished Responsibility Flashcards

1
Q

What Act of Parliament introduced the defence of diminished responsibility, the defence of which did not exist in English law until there?

A

Homicide Act 1957

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

Before 1957 what was the only defence available for a person with mental problems who killed?

A

insanity

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

Before 1957 Homicide Act, the only defence available for a person with mental problems who killed was insanity, what were 2 problems with the test for insanity?

A

the test is very narrow and many defendants who clearly suffer from a mental illness did not always come within it

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

Why was the defence for diminished responsibility created?

A

as the test for insanity was very narrow and many defendants who clearly suffered from a mental illness did not always come within it

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

Under what section of the Homicide Act was the defence for diminished responsibility set up?

A

under s2(1)

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

What Act has amended s2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957 for diminished responsibility ?

A

s.52 Coroners and Justice Act 2009

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

What is the effect of s.52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?

A

A person who kills or is a party to the killing of another is not to be convicted of murder if he is suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which

a) arose from a recognised medical condition
b) substantially impaired D’s ability to
* understand the nature of his conduct
* form a rational judgement
* exercise self control
c) provides an explanation for D’s acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing

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

Under s52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, a person who kills or is a party to the killing of another is not to be convicted of murder if he was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which: … (3)

A

a) arose from a recognised medical condition
b) substantially impaired D’s ability to
* understand the nature of his conduct
* form a rational judgement
* exercise self control
c) provides an explanation for D’s acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing

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

Where does the burden of proof for the defence of diminished responsibility lie ?

A

with the defendant

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

Although the burden of proving the defence of diminished responsibility, what does the defendant need only prove it on?

A

on the balance of probabilities

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

before s52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, what was the phrase used for diminished responsibility before ‘abnormality of mental functioning’?

A

‘abnormality of mind’

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

In what case did the COA describe an ‘abnormality of mind’ as a ‘state of mind so different from the ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal’?

A

Byrne 1960

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What happened in the case of Byrne 1960?

A

D was a sexual psychopath who strangled a young woman and mutilated her body. Medical evidence showed that his condition meant he was unable to control his perverted desires. Convicted of murder, COA substituted this with manslaughter

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

D was a sexual psychopath who strangled a young woman and mutilated her body. Medical evidence showed that his condition meant he was unable to control his perverted desires. Convicted of murder, COA substituted this with manslaughter
What case is this?

A

Byrne 1960

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

Although the case of Byrne 1960 was on the old definition, what is likely?

A

it is likely that the courts will still use the same standard of abnormality

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

Under s2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957, as amended, the cause of the abnormality of mental functioning must arise from what?

A

a ‘recognised medical condition’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What does a ‘recognised medical condition’ as the cause of the abnormality of mental functioning allow to cover?

A

this allows both psychological and physical conditions to be covered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are 3 examples of psychological conditions?

A
  • Battered wives syndrome
  • paranoia
  • depressive illness
19
Q

What are 3 examples of physical conditions which is covered by a ‘recognised medical condition’?

A

epilepsy
sleep disorders
diabetes

20
Q

What must be given at the trial in order to prove that there was an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognised medical condition?

A

medical evidence

21
Q

What must an abnormality of mental functioning do in order for the defence of diminished responsibility to arise?

A

it must substantially impair the defendants mental responsibility for his acts or omissions in doing or being a party to the killing

22
Q

In the case of Byrne 1960 what did the COA say regarding the question of whether the impairment was substantial?

A

the COA said that the question of whether the impairment was substantial was one of degree and that it was for the jury to decide

23
Q

In which case was it held that substantial does not mean total, nor does it mean trivial or minimal; it is something in-between for the jury to decide if the defendants mental responsibility is impaired and if so, if it is substantially impaired?

A

Lloyd 1967

24
Q

What did the case of lloyd 1967 hold regarding substantial impairment?

A

it was held that substantial does not mean total, nor does it mean trivial or minimal; it is something in between for the jury to decide if the defendants mental responsibility is impaired and if so, if it is substantially impaired

25
Q

Although the case of Lloyd 1967 held that that it is up to the jury to decide whether a defendants mental responsibility was impaired, and if so, substantially impaired- as it is a question of fact what does the judge have the power to do and why?

A

the judge can withdraw the point from the jury if there is no evidence on which a reasonable jury could conclude that the defendants mental responsibility was substantially impaired

26
Q

Why are the decisions in cases such as Byrne and Lloyd prior to s52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 likely to still be followed?

A

as the phrase ‘substantially impaired’ remains in the new deffiniton

27
Q

What counts as being substantially impaired?

A
a defendants ability to do one of these 3 things...
-understand the nature of his conduct 
-to form a rational judgement 
-to exercise self control 
....must be substantially impaired
28
Q

What are the 3 things which an abnormality of mental functioning would substantially impair?

A
  • to understand the nature of his conduct
  • to form a rational judgement
  • to exercise self control
29
Q

Where can the three things which an abnormality of mental functioning can impair be found?

A

these can be found in s2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957

30
Q

in what case was the 3 points from what substantially impairs D used?

A

Byrne 1960

31
Q

What have the amendments made by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 effectively done?

A

it put the decision of Byrne into statutory form

32
Q

What are 2 examples of situations where D does not have the ability to understand the nature of his conduct?

A
  • Where D is un an automatic state and does not know what he is doing
  • Where D suffers from delusions and believes that he is killing the devil when in fact he is killing a person
33
Q

Under being substantially impaired, what does the point that the defendant has to have the ability to understand the nature of his conduct, also cover?

A

it covers people with severe learning difficulties whose mental age is so low that they do not understand the nature of what they are doing

34
Q

Even if D does know the nature of his conduct, what might he not be able to form?

A

a rational judgement about his acts or omissions

35
Q

What are three mental conditions which may mean that those suffering will not be able to form a rational judgement?

A

paranoia or schizophrenia or Battered Wives Syndrome

36
Q

What case gives an example of when D may not have the ability to excretes self control?

A

Byrne, D was a sexual psychopath and medical evidence said that this meant he was unable to control his perverted desires and so the defence of diminished responsibility was available to him

37
Q

In order to come within the defence of diminished responsibility, what does D have to prove an explanation for?

A

for his acts and omissions in doing or being party to the killing

38
Q

What is a new principle brought in under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?

A

that D must provide an explanation for conduct in order to have a defence of diminished responsibility

39
Q

Under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 what does the new principle say there must now be when D provides an explanation for conduct?

A

that there now must be some casual connection between Ds abnormality of mental functioning and the killing

40
Q

Which section other Homicide Act 1957 explains the principle of D having to provide an explanation for conduct?

A

s2(1B)

41
Q

Under s2(1B) of the Homicide Act 1957, what does it state on the principle of D having to provide an explanation for conduct?

A

“…an abnormality of mental functioning provides an explanation for D;s conduct if it causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing D to carry out that conduct”

42
Q

What does it mean that “an abnormality of mental functioning provides an explanation for D’s conduct if it causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing D to carry out that conduct” as explained in s2(1B) of the Homicide Act 1957?

A

this means that the abnormality of mental functioning need not be the only factor which caused D to do to be involved in the killing. However it must be a significant factor. This is particularly important where D is intoxicated at the time of the killing.

43
Q

Under the Homicide Act 1957 s2(1B) it is explained that the abnormality of mental functioning need not be the only factor which caused D to do to be involved in the killing. However it must be a significant factor. When is this particularly important?

A

when D is intoxicated at the time of the killing