Exam Revision Flashcards
Gross negligence manslaughter - R v Rose
- D owed a DOC
- D negligently breached it
- It was reasonably foreseeable
- The breach caused death
- Breach was so bad it amounted to gross negligence
U and D act manslaughter
- Unlawful act
- Was dangerous
- That act caused the death of the victim - AG’s ref 3
An unlawful act that a reasonable person would think would risk some harm, albeit not serious harm
Church
Criticisms of Unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter
- Offence is too broad
- To label a person who envisaged no more than a battery a manslaughterer is disproportionate and unfair
- Breaches principle of correspondence
- An extreme form of constructive liability (grossly exaggerates the amount of culpability)
- Attributes too much weight to chance of whether someone commits a battery and faces 6 months or life imprisonment
Peter Sparks argument
The defence of diminished responsibility is flawed. D’s mental abnormality ahould be a complete defence if it is the reason they killed or no defence at all if they would’ve killed anyway.
Loss of control - coroners and justice act 2009 s54
- D lost self control
- Caused by a qualifying trigger of fear of serious violence, things done or said of grave character creating a justifiable sense of being wronged.
- A person of D’s age or sex with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint would have reacted the same in D’s circumstances
If D acts out of a desire for revenge the defence will fail
Loss of control - s54 c&j 2009
Slow burn anger response
Ahluwalia - loss of control
Sexual Infidelity cannot be a thing done or said in loss of control
S55(6) c&j 2009
The loss of control need not be sudden
S54(2) c&j 2009
Baker and Zhao argument
Sexual infidelity should not be considered at all in loss of control not even as context
Andrew Ashworth argument
The ladder principle demands the proportionate wrongfulness of the offence should be pointed out by the label attatched to that offence. Accurate labelling promotes transparency.
Law commission consultation paper 2005
Proposed separating murder into 2 degrees. 1st (intention to kill) and 2nd (intention to do gbh)
Lord Steyn in Powell
Including intention to do gbh in murder turns it into a constructive crime. A person who only intended gbh is not ‘in truth’ a murderer
Mandatory life sentence criticism
- Different murders have different degrees of culpability
- Intention to cause gbh does not seem fair to always be a life sentence
Indirect intent - Woolin
Virtually certain and D knew it
Intention to do GBH
Smith
Unlawful killing if a human being under the kings peace with malice aforethought in any country of the realm
Sir Edward Coke
Death occurs at brain death
Malcherek
Killing is not unlawful if it was done in self defence
Beckford
Diminished Responsibility c&j act 2009 s52
- Abnormality of mental function
- From a recognised medical condition
- Substantially impaired D’s ability to understand their conduct, form a rational judgement and excercise self control
- Provides an explanation for the killing
Voluntary acute intoxication is not capable of beong relied on for diminished responsibility
R v Dowds
Self defence is a common law defence
Duffy
Self defence covers unjustified attacks/threats to oneself or others
Williams Gladstone
The Imminence requirement of self defence is gendered
Protects men in one time adversarial encounters more than women
Law commission 2004 recommendation on self defence
It is insufficient to weigh the weapons used in each side; sometimes there is an imbalance in size and strength
Celia Wells
Behind the defence of self defence is the stereotype of one to one, man to man violence
Assault
D intentionally or recklessly causes V to apprehend imminent and unlawful force
Assault can be done by gestures, word, silence
Ireland v Burstow
Battery
The intentional or reckless infliction of unlawful force
S47 assault occasioning abh
There must be an assault or battery which occassions abh
Occasions = causes
Roberts
Actual bodily harm = any hurt or injury which interferes with health or comfort
Donovan, Miller
Section 20, GBH
D must unlawfully wound or inflict GBH
Gbh = very serious harm
DPP v Smith
Maliciously = intentionally or recklessly
Cunningham
Herrings argument on rape
A man who has sexual intercourse with another knowing that that person would not be agreeing if they knew the truth is using that person for his own ends. It is the “sheer use of another person”. It should be rape”.
Gross’ view on rape
“the criminal law cannot be used to teach moral lessons or to raise the moral consciousness of those whose views may be in need of moral uplift”.
Sharpe’s view on gender deception
non-disclosure of gender is not deceptive; doesn’t think the harm or offence suffered warrants criminalisation; and Sharpe that gender history ought not to be viewed as a material fact serving to vitiate consent
Edwards argument
Women who use weapons do so to arm themselves against disproportionate male strength
