Involuntary Manslaughter Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What constitutes Unlawful Act Manslaughter?

A

An unlawful act intentionally performed under circumstances rendering it dangerous, which causes death.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the key case for Unlawful Act Manslaughter?

A

R v Bristow [2013] EWCA Crim 1540
-(car burglary - owner run over when robbers escaped)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What must the unlawful act in Unlawful Act Manslaughter entail?(Nature of crime)

A

Must be a full crime, not a civil wrong or mere negligence. It must be an act, not an omission, and need not be directed at the victim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Can you name cases illustrating the criteria for an unlawful act in Unlawful Act Manslaughter? (Intentionally performed)

A

R v Franklin (1883), (Tort case- not just a civil wrong - took box from market stool - threw into sea= killed a swimmer)

R v Lamb [1967] (friends messing around - do not know bullet in chamber)(unlwaful act was not present)

R v Kennedy [2007] (Unlawful act not dangerous if victim makes full choice Gives friend syringe of heroin),

R v Lowe [1973] (does not get doctor to treat child),

R v Mitchell [1983](case- ‘transferred malice’ - hits old man who falls into old woman,

R v Dhaliwal (abuses wife for years - she passes by suicide= no recognised psychiatric injury= manslaughter does not count) [2006],

R v Lipman [1970] (LSD - intoxicated - thought girlfriend was a snake= stuffed bed sheets down mouth = not a defence).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What test determines if an act is dangerous in Unlawful Act Manslaughter?

A

An objective test where all sober and reasonable people would recognise the risk of some harm. (R v Church [1966]) (fight after V mocks D for not satisfying sexually - D throws V in river = unlawful act must be subject the other person to the risk of some harm albeit not serious).

DPP v Newbury & Jones [1977] (boys throw rock over train and kills a guard)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are some key secondary sources on Unlawful Act Manslaughter?

A

Barry Mitchell -Thin skull role - focus on ‘one punch killer’ = Too severe = A focus on how ‘lucky’ you are opposed to what your intentions are.

Richard Taylor [2019] (Argues for the case an Act by Omissions contrary to current law= reforming the law by legislating for an offence of reckless manslaughter = less culpable defendants convicted under unlawful act manslaughter, where they ‘have committed a positive act.’ Positive acts = i.e., pushing a slab off a cliff

&

Tony Storey (R v Broughton focus = Against original test -requiring a jury to answer this question = invites defence to speculate - Instead test should be whether unlawful conduct= shortened victims life.)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the elements of Gross Negligence Manslaughter?

A

R v Rose (Optician - does not do job properly - boy dies).

Duty of care, negligent breach, serious risk of death, causation, and reasonably foreseeable that breach of a duty would give rise to a serious and obvious risk of death, reprehensible circumstances(circumstances so exceptionally blameworthy it involves negligence worthy of criminal sanction).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Which (2) cases is pivotal for understanding Gross Negligence Manslaughter?

A

R v Adomako [1995] 1 A.C. 171
R v Rose (2017)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

How is the duty of care determined in Gross Negligence Manslaughter?
(What case outlines this?)

A

It’s a legal matter, with the existence of duty based on the particular facts for the jury.

(R v Gemma Evans [2009])
-Gives heroin to 15 year old sister and she dies - did not call doctor or authorities= did not want to get introuble again for drug possession).

-Context basis = Jury decides the facts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What must the breach of duty establish in Gross Negligence Manslaughter?
(What two cases?)

A

It must present an obvious and serious risk of death, which can be by act or omission.

(R v Singh [1999]= circumstances must be such that a person would not have foreseen the serious and obvious risk - not merely of injury or even serious injury = but of death.

, R v Misra [2004])= has to be a risk of death not just bodily injury or injury to health. (affirms adamako)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What cases illustrate breach and causation in Gross Negligence Manslaughter?
(4 mentioned for this card)(Medical cases)

A

R v Bateman (1925) (showed such disregard for life and safe of others as to amount to a crime).

R v Misra [2004],(not all negligence reaching the threshold of being grossly negligent automatically constitutes a crime, = attempting to counter the circularity argument.
+ Calls for a clearer definition to delineate the threshold for negligence that constitutes gross negligence manslaughter, i.e., by incorporating specific standards of care or examples of what constitutes “far below” the expected level of care = to assist jury’s)

R v Sellu, (Fails to take immediate action despite X-ray, fails to respond to nurse + failure to operate within 8 hours)
-Principle= jury should be consistent failings can amount to gross negligence. (accumulation argument)

R v Bawa-Garba [2016]
(Reaffirms question for whether D’s actions were ‘truly exceptionally bad.’)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Can you list some secondary sources discussing Gross Negligence Manslaughter?
(=Further readings) (+ what they argue?)

A

Karl Laird [2018]-Focuses on Rose case (3 concerns) = argues conviction should not be quashed instead the a. optician should have acted according to ordinary standards of job=check the eye scan. b. possible issues in the future regarding breach of care = easier for defendants to get away with breach.
c.Undermines the objective test set out in Adamako

, Jonathan Rogers [2009] (Proposes a special regime within the framework of the Misuse of Drugs Act that would cater more specifically for the variety of circumstances that may arise under gross negligence)

Winnie Chan & A. P. Simester(Argue for the maintenance of distinction for rules - i.e., self defence = different from duress = duress is a response to her attacker)
THEY
(Focuse on duress as a defence for the murder of another - C; argument of Clarkson = who argues it may now be possible/desirable, to remove traditional distinctions + absorb various defences of duress, with self-defence + private defence= a single defence of necessary action.
=Makes the rule more simpler + fcous on the true issues that unite present offences to context.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly