Involuntary Manslaughter Flashcards
What are the two forms of IMS
- Unlawful Act MS
- Gross Negligence MS
Breakdown of UAM
- An Unlawful Act
- The act must be dangerous
- Substantial cause of death
- Mens Rea
An Unlawful Act
It must be based on a criminal act - Lamb
It must NOT be based on a civil matter!
Usually unlawful acts are those of against the person
An omission will NOT suffice!
The act must be dangerous
The test as to whether the act s dangerous is an objective one, where the act must be so dangerous is the sense that the average person would term it that it would cause some form of physical harm to another. - R v Church
The jury must be directed to consider the possibility of physical harm as opposed to merely emotional harm. - Mitchell, R v Dawson.
It is enough that the dangerous act is aimed at property.
Substantial cause of death
Chain of causation must be considered here along with the thin skull rule.
An example where the UA was a direst cause is the case of Corion-Auguiste
An example where the CoC was broken - Kennedy
The original act does not have to be the sole cause of the death as seen in Shohid and Carey
Mens rea for UAM
The ad committing the intentional act must have the accompanied MR
The D doesn’t need to realise the risk of causing some harm - DPP v Newbury&Jones
If there is no MR for the unlawful act then the D is not liable
What is gross negligence manslaughter?
Based on the principles of negligence where a person dies as a result of the negligence of another. The degree of negligence is so serious to term the D as criminally liable for the death.
What are the elements to GNM?
Comes from the case of Adamako:
- Must be a Duty of care
- D must have breached this duty
- The negligence must be so gross that the jury considers it to be criminal
- The GN was the substantial cause of death
Duty of care
Omission:
- Contractual Duties - Singh, Litchfield
- Voluntary Assumption
- Official position
- Special relationship
- D has set in motion a chain of events
Could also be civil:
Caparo rules
What are the caparo rules
Reasonably foreseeability
Proximity
Fair just and reasonableness
Reasonable foreseeability
Would a reasonable person in the defendants position see that someones in the victims position would suffer harm?
Proximity
How close where the D and V? Through what sort of relation?
Fair just and reasonable
Would it open the floodgates of litigation?
Breach of duty
Where the D falls below the standard required
Negligence must be so gross that the jury considers it to be criminal
Bateman sets out the test as negligence is so gross when it goes beyond the mere compensation as such shows disregard to the health and safety of the victim. Risk of death
Adamako: whether the conduct of the D was so bad in all the circumstances as to amount to a criminal act or omission.
If the jury feels that D’s actions is so bad it is criminal they must find him guilty
Contrasting examples: Finlay, Edwards
