fatal offences

Question 1

Murder: definition:

Answer 1

The unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being, under the King’s peace, with malice aforethought, express or implied’

Question 2

Murder: sentencing

Answer 2

Murder (Abolition of the Death Penalty) Act 1965
life imprisonment

Question 3

Murder: AR

Answer 3

Unlawful killing of a human being under the kings peace

Question 4

Murder AR: unlawful

Answer 4

R v Clegg: some killings are lawful

Question 5

Murder AR: Human being

Answer 5

Ag Ref No3 : a person is not a human being unless they live independently of the mother
R v Malcherek and steel: a person with an inactive brain stem is not a human being in law

Question 6

Murder AR: under the kings peace

Answer 6

R v Clegg: bracketing case

Question 7

Murder MR:

Answer 7

R v Vickers: Malice afore though express or implied has been taken to mean intention to kill or cause GBH

Question 8

Voluntary manslaughter: definition

what type of defence ?
sentence if sucessful ?

Answer 8

Partial defence to murder only. if successful conviction of murder swapped for discretionary life sentence

Question 9

Voluntary manslaughter: Loss of control

(think of the 3 tests)

Answer 9

S.54 Corners and Justice Act 2009: person will not be convicted if these 3 tests are met
1. the act/omission arose from loss of control
2. the loss of control had a qualifying trigger
3. A person of the defendants same sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint would have acted the same way

Question 10

voluntary manslaughter

Loss of control: the act/omission

(think of loss of control)

Answer 10

R v Jewell: must be a total loss of control. Has the defendant lost all ability to maintain their actions in accordance with considered judgement
S.54(2) the LOC does not have to sudden

Question 11

voluntary manslaughter

2. Qualifying trigger

Answer 11

S.55(3): fear of serious violence from the victim
S.55(4): A thing or things said or done, which constitutes circumstances of extremely gave character and caused the defendant a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged
S.55(5): can be combination of both

Question 12

voluntary manslaughter

2. qualifying trigger (Excluded matters):

Answer 12

S.55(6)(c): sexual infidelity
R v Clinton: things said or done still can qualify if disregarding the sexual infidelity
S.54(4): a considered desire for revenge (R v Irbams and Gregory)

Question 13

voluntary manslaughter

3. Standard of self control

Answer 13

S.54 (1)(c): if a person of Ds same sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self control would of reacted the same
R v Rejmanski: objective test (reasonable man)

Question 14

Diminished responsibility (DR): definition

Act ?
Amended by ?

Answer 14

S.2 Homicide Act (as emended by S.52 Coroners and justice Act 2009): a person is not guilty of murder if:

Question 15

DR: 1st test

why is the responsibility diminished ?

Answer 15

Abnormality of mental functioning:
R v Byrne: a state of mind so different from the ordinary human being that the reasonable man would deem it abnormal

Question 16

DR: 2nd test

Answer 16

Arose from a recognised mental condition:
Depression: R v Seers/ R v Gittens
Paranoid psychosis: R v Sanderson
Personality disorder: R v Martin
Battered wife syndrome: R v Ahulhulia
Alcohol dependency: R v Wood
ICD 10/11

Question 17

DR: 3rd test

Answer 17

substantially impaired the defendants ability to:
-understand nature of conduct
-from rational judgement
-exercise self control

Question 18

DR: 4th test

Answer 18

reason for the killing
intoxication:
-if the defendant is intoxicated at the time of the killing (R v Dowds)
-defendant was intoxicated and pre-existing abnormality of the mind (R v Dietschmann)
- due to addiction

Question 19

Involuntary manslaughter

MR?
Offence or Defence?

Answer 19

-No MR for murder
-offence not defence

Question 20

Invol mans: 1st test

Answer 20

D committed an unlawful act
R v Franklin: criminal act not civil wrong
R v Lowe: positive act not an omission

Question 21

Invol mans: 2nd test

Answer 21

Act is objectively dangerous
R v Church: all sober and reasonable individuals would recognise the risk of Some harm occurring
R v Mitchell: objective test

Question 22

Invol mans: 3rd test

Answer 22

the act caused the death
Causation applies

Question 23

Invol mans: 4th test

Answer 23

mens rea for the unlawful act
DPP v Newbury and jones: mens rea for the unlawful act, doesn’t mean they have to realise the act is legally wrong

Question 24

Gross negligence manslaughter

offence or defence ?
number of tests ?
case ?

Answer 24

-common law offence
-five test needed to prove it contained under R v Akomako

Question 25

Gross neg mans: 1st test

Answer 25

the existence of of a duty of care by the defendant to the victim:
R v Adomako: the ordinary principles of negligence apply

Question 26

Gross neg mans: 1st test (Robinson)

Answer 26

sets out the test for imposing a duty
1. falls under a category of previously established liability
2. can it be extended by analogy
3. only in new and novel situations use Caparo

Question 27

Gross neg mans: 2nd test

Answer 27

conduct (act/omission) in breach of that duty:
-must be proved that the defendant breach their duty
-breach if they fall below the standards of the reasonable man in respect of age and profession

Question 28

Gross neg mans: 3rd test

Answer 28

created a serious and obvious risk of death
R v misra and shrivastava: circumstances must be such that a reasonable person would have foreseen an obvious risk of not just injury but death also

Question 29

Gross neg mans: 4th test

Answer 29

caused a death:
causation rules apply

Question 30

Gross neg mans: 5th test

Answer 30

amounts to gross negligence
R v Bateman: the acts show such a disregard to human safety that it amounts to a crime against the state