Diminished Responsibility Year 13

Question 1

Where does it come from?

Answer 1

S.2 Homicide Act 1957 as amened by S.52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009

Question 2

What is the first part of the definition?

Answer 2

A person will not be found guilty of murder if, at the time of the killing, the suffering from abnormally of mental functioning which arose from:

Question 3

What are the 3 parts of the definition?

Answer 3

A recognised medical condition.

Which substantially impaired the D ability to form rational judgements, understand the nature of their conduct or exercise self control.

It provides an explanation for the D acts and omissions in doing or being party to the killing.

Question 4

What is abnormality of mental functioning? Case.

Answer 4

The defendant must be suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning at the time of the killing. R v Bryne.

Question 5

Depressive illness

Answer 5

R v Gittens

Question 6

Irresistible impulses

Answer 6

R v Bryne

Question 7

Battered Woman Syndrome

Answer 7

R v Ahluwalia

Question 8

Alcoholism

Answer 8

R v Wood

Question 9

Alchol Dependency Syndrome

Answer 9

R v Stewart

Question 10

Paranoia

Answer 10

R v Simcox

Question 11

Adjustment Disorder

Answer 11

R v Dietschmann

Question 12

Epilepsy

Answer 12

R v Campbell

Question 13

Pre-menstrual Tension

Answer 13

R v Smith

Question 14

Post Natal Depression

Answer 14

R v Reynolds

Question 15

Schizophrenia

Answer 15

R v Moyle

Question 16

Paranoid Personality Disorder

Answer 16

R v Martin (Antony)

Question 17

What is a recognised medical condition, how does it link? Is it only mental conditions?

Answer 17

The abnormality of functioning must be caused by a recognised medical condition. Medical not mental so can be physical or psycological conditions.

Question 18

How will each case be decided for recognised medical conditions?

Answer 18

Will be decided on its own merits and medical evidence will be given at trial.

Question 19

What does it mean by substantial impairment in relation of diminished responsibility? Case.

Answer 19

The D must suffer from a substantial impairment as a result of their medical condition.
R v Golds

Question 20

How must a jury approach it and does the D have to be fully impaired?

Answer 20

The jury must not be directed to the meaning of substantial but the judge, it asked, can guide them on the point that the D must not be fully impaired.

Question 21

What must the abnormality of mental function do in relation to substantial impairment?

Answer 21

Must substantially impair the D mental responsibility of his acts or omissions in doing or being party to the killing.

Question 22

The D ability to do one of three things must be substantially impaired. What are they?

Answer 22

To understand the nature of their conduct.

To form rational judgement.

To exercise self-control.

Question 23

Explain the ability to understand the nature of their conduct.

What does it cover? Give three examples.

Answer 23

Situations where the D is in an automatic state and is unaware of what they are doing.

Where the D firmly believes that they are suffering delusions and believe they are carrying out the act for a higher purpose (e.g. killing the devil but it’s actually Tom from down the road).

People who have learning difficulties and may not fully understand the nature of what they are doing.

Question 24

Explain the ability to form rational judgements, with case law.

Answer 24

Even if D does know the nature of their conduct, they may not be able to form rational judgements.

Common in those that suffer from paranoia (R v Martin Antony) or schizophrenia (R v Moyles).
Also in Battered Women’s Syndrome.

R v Alhuwalia

Question 25

Explain the ability to exercise self control, with case law.

Is it the same as Loss Of Control?

Answer 25

The D may have lost the ability to exercise self control due to her abnormality of mental functioning.

Loss of control is a partial defence to murder but the requirements are not the same under minimised responsibility.

All the D has to show is that loss of control was caused by her medical condition.

R v Byrne.

Question 26

What must the abnormality of MF provide an explanation for?

Answer 26

The D actions or omissions in doing or being party to the killing.

Question 27

If there is no causal link then the defence will not be available and the D will be liable for?

Answer 27

Murder

Question 28

There has to be a causal link between what two things?

Answer 28

Abnormality of mental functioning and the actions of killing or being party to the killing.

Question 29

Does the AofMF need to be the sole reason for the killing?

Answer 29

No, but it does have to be the substantial cause of the D actions or omissions.

Question 30

Is this the case (sole reason concept) for where the D suffers from AofMF and intoxication? Give a case example.

Answer 30

Yes. R v Osbourne

Question 31

What is the legal principle in R v Dietschmann?

Answer 31

For the defence of diminished responsibility, the abnormality must have been a substantial cause of the killing, but need not be the sole cause.

Question 32

Can intoxication alone support a defence of diminished responsibility? Case.

Answer 32

No, R v Dowds.

Question 33

There are exceptions to the rule where a pre-existing abnormality of MF exists and the D is intoxicated at the time of the killing. Give case examples.

Answer 33

R v Osborne; R v Dietschmann

Question 34

The defendant must prove what?

Answer 34

The full elements of diminished responsibility.

Question 35

Give an example of involuntary intoxication.

Answer 35

ADS- whereby a person cannot control their consumption of alcohol.

Question 36

What was the old law on involuntary and voluntary intoxication?

Answer 36

The court had to decide whether the consumption of alcohol was v or in.

Question 37

What is the new law of intoxication? Case.

Answer 37

Developed since old and it is now for the jury to decide whether ADS will satisfy the defence of diminished responsibility or whether the D was just simply drunk. (source of AofMF) R v Stewart.

Question 38

A staged test to help the jury determine whether ADS amounts to a successful plea of diminished responsibility.:

Answer 38

1. Was the defendant suffering from an A of MF?
2. If so, was this caused by ADS? (Yes- nature and extent of DS must be examined by the jury based on whether or not it is irresistible and the amount consumed).
3. If so, was the D mental responsibility substantially impaired? (Medical evidence must be examined clearly at this stage including how well the D could control her drinking and seriousness of the dependency).
4. If so, did the abnormality cause, or was it the significant cause, of the killing.