Fatal offences + Manslaughter

Question 1

What is Murder?

Answer 1

Murder is a common law offence, with mandatory life sentence (with tariffs).

Question 2

Actus Reus of Murder

Answer 2

• Causing:
  Rules of causation apply here
• Unlawful death:
  All death will be considered unlawful unless it is a doctor withdrawing treatment (Airedale NHS Trust v Bland)
  Or if a valid defence applies - Necessity (Re A)
• Of a human being;
  A feotus is not considered a human being (AG’s Ref 3 of 94)
  Life ends at brain stem death (R v Malcherek)
  Brain damage are still humans (Inglis)
• Under the kings Peace:
  Refers to death outside of wartime - although a solider who kills outside of battle is still guilty. (R v Clegg)

Question 3

Mens Rea of murder

Answer 3

-Malice Aforethought,
= Intention to kill –> express malice
= Intention to commit GBH –> Implied malice (R v Vickers/ R v Cunningham)
- Intention can be:
Direct intention (R v Mohan - main aim)
Oblique/Indirect Intention - Virtually certain consequence (R v Nedrick)

Question 4

What is looked at in Voluntary Manslaughter? - Defence is diminished responsibility!

Answer 4

V Manslaughter is under the Homicide Act 1957, s.2
V Manslaughter is a special defence to murder - D charged with murder, reduced to manslaughter if successful.
Burden of proof is on the defence on the balance of probabilities (R v Wilcocks)
Medical evidence is required for a defence to succeed (R v Golds)

Question 5

What are the first two requirements for diminished responsibility?

Answer 5

1) Abnormality of mental functioning - R v Byrne, D is in a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal.
2) Recognised medical condition - This can be physical and psychological recognised by world health organisations. ( R v Dowds):
THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE MUST SHOW THAT THE CONDITION CAUSED THE ABNORMALITY OF MENTAL FUNCTIONING.

Question 6

Examples for Recognised medical conditions

Answer 6

R v Byrne-Irresistible impulses

R V Alhuwalia - Battered wives syndrome

R v Wood – Alcohol Dependency Syndrome

R v Campbell - Epilepsy and Frontal lobe damage

R v Smith - Pre-menstrual tension

R v Reynolds - Post natal depression

R v Gittens - Depression and alcoholism

R v Martin - paranoid personality disorder

Question 7

Last two requirements for diminished responsibility.

Answer 7

• Substantially Impairs:
  Jury decides if the impairment was substantial enough to lead D to Kill (R v Golds)
  Needs to be more than trivial impairment (R v Lloyd)
  Condition must imair D from:

(a) To understand the nature of his conduct

(b) To form a rational judgement

(c) To exercise self-control (Byrne)

• Provides an explanation:
  There must be a causal link between D’s abnormality of mental functioning and killing
  If medical condition made no difference to their behaviour then the defence fails.
  Brennan - If 2 doctors agree on RMC explaining actions, murder must be withdrawn from the jury.