Involuntary Manslaughter Flashcards
What are the 2 types of involuntarily manslaughter
Unlawful act manslaughter
Gross negligence manslaughter
How is unlawful act manslaughter definined
Liability is built up from the lesser crime, for example, if the D intended to commit an armed robbery and killed someone while carrying out the offence
To prove unlawful act manslaughter what is needed to be proven
- A positive act
- An unlawful act
- Unlawful act should be dangerous
- The positive act can be done with the necessary mens rea
- Chain of causation be intact and death ensue
- A positive act UAM
Unlike murder the act cannot be an omission
- unlawful act
UAM
The unlawful act must be a crime and not a civil wrong
R v Ball
DPP v Newbury
R v lamb
- Dangerous act (objective test)
UAM
The reasonable person must recognise that the act of the D would cause the other person ‘some harm’
R v Church
R v JM and SM
What if it is an act against property?
UAM
Can be against property so long as church rule of reasonable sober person applies
R v Goodfellow
What if fear and apprehension UAM
Fear and apprehension will not be enough
R v Dawson
- The positive act be done with necessary mens rea
Must be shown there is the necessary MR
DPP v Newbury
- Causing the death of the victim UAM
But be the factual causation, legal causation, more than minimal, can be broken by intervening act
R v cato
R v Kennedy
Kimsey
What is gross negligence manslaughter
Breach of a duty of care leading to the death
Adomako
R v Broughton
Elements needed for GNM
- Duty of care
- Breach of duty of care
- At the time of breach there was a serious and obvious risk of death
- It was reasonably foreseeable at the time of breach that it gave rise to serious and obvious risk of death
- The breach caused death (factual and legal)
- Ds actions so grossly negligent that they could be classed as a crime
- Duty of care GNM
The duty of care should be obvious
Singh
R v Wacker
R v Stone & Dobinson
- Breach of duty GNM
Fails to meet applicable standard of care
Blythe v Birmingham
Bolam v Friern
Wacker
- Serious and obvious risk of death GNM
More than a minimal or remote
- It was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the breach of the duty that the breach gave rise to a serious and obvious risk of death GNM
Look at if obvious at the time of breach
- Causing the death GNM
Factual and legal
R v Wacker
- Breach must be gross GNM
For jury to decide and an objective test as to what is considered to be gross
R v Misra & Srivastava