Diminished responsibility Flashcards
How would DR be argued by D
a recognized medical condition diminished their responsibility for their killing
what did the court hold in the case of sanders
jury had to look at ALL the circumstances
who was the burden of proof
burden of proof on D to show he has DR on the balance of probabilitites. BUT prosecution can also raise DR in certain cases
what happened in the case of Brennan
D was convicted of murder despited uncontradicted medical evidence, this was because evidence suggested that the murder was well-planned.
what is the source of DR
S2 Homicide Act 1957
First part of DR
D must suffer from an abnormality of mental functioning
Byrne - open direction, entirely left to juries
first test under amended law - aruged that medical expretise/evidence will play a greater role to help jury decide if D meets this requirement
second part of DR
Abnormality must arise from a recognized medical condition
again, role of medical evidence is important.
medical condition could vary and include physical, psychiatric and psychological medcial conditions
list some medical conditions recognized from old test
adjustment disorder battered woman syndrome depression epilepsy othello syndrome (extreme jealousy) paranoia
case example for adjustment order
dietschmann
case example for battered woman syndrome
ahluwalia
case exampled for depression
ahluwalia
case example for othello syndrome (extreme jealousy)
vinagre
case example for epilepsy
campbell
case example for paranoia
simcox
who recognizes the recognized medical condition
it is a matter of law - DOWDS
what does the case of Dowds say
that a matter of law recognizes the medical condition and that it is necessary, but not always sufficient, that a condition is included in one of the diagnostic manuals
third part of DR
abnormality must substantially impaired d’s ability to do one or more things
what is the issue of ability
a matter of psychiatry - how far d deviates from the normal ability to do those things
what is substantially ipar
CRUCIAL
GOLDS -
can mean two things
1 - D’s ability are impaired to more than a trivial or minimal extent
OR
2 - D’s abilities are ‘significantly or appreciably impaired’
what are “one of things”?
a - d’s ability to understand the nature of their conduct
b - d’s ability to form a rational judgment
c - d’s ability to excersie self-control.
Law commission example of D’s ability to understnad that nature of their conduct
Boy plays video games for hours most of his life
kills child when child takes stuff
does not understnad that people to not revive like in game
fourth part of DR
the abnormality must provide an explanation for D’s conduct of killing - means that there must be clear link between act/omission and their abnormality of mental functioning
can intoxicated D’s claim DR
R v dietschmann, the courts held that the causative effect of alcohol did no necessarily prevent an abnormality of mind
Alcohol dependency syndrom and DR
HARSH - R v Tandy
for a craving to amount to a disease, the drink had to be involuntary, T could not show that first drink was involuntary therefore defence could not succeed
