Involuntary Manslaughter: - UAM Flashcards
What is Unlawful Act Manslaughter ?
D carries out an unlawful & dangerous act which causes. D didn’t intend or foresee a risk of death.
What is the Actus Reus of Unlawful Act Manslaughter ?
D carries out unlawful act
Is a dangerous act
Causes death
What is the Mens Rea of Unlawful Act Manslaughter ?
Mens Rea for the original unlawful act needed
No intention or foresight of death required.
Actus Reus; - 1. Unlawful Act
The defendant must have committed unlawful act, it must be a crime.
R v Franklin: - The unlawful act must be criminal, a civil wrong isn’t enough
R v Lowe: - The unlawful act can’t be an omission, it must be an act
R v Lamb: - Elements of the unlawful act must be satisfied
R v Kennedy: - It’s not important which crime was used on the basis of the unlawful act, as long as its clear and consistent.
Actus Reus: - 2. Dangerous Act
The unlawful act that the defendant committed must be seen as dangerous. This means there was some risk of harm. However, it doesn’t need to be a risk of death.
DPP v Newbury & Jones (1976): - The jury must decide if the defendant’s unlawful act was dangerous using the objective test. This means it doesn’t matter if the defendant didn’t personally think it was dangerous.
R v Church (1965): - “The unlawful act must be such as all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognize must subject the other person to, at least, the risk of some harm resulting there from albeit not serious harm”.
Actus Reus: - 3. Causes Death
Causation is the significant part of the Actus Reus for result crimes proving not only did the defendant do something or fail to do something, but this act or omission is what caused the victim’s injury or death.
There are three things that need to be proven for causation: -
- Factual Cause: - This states whether, based on statistics, did the Defendant’s act or omission cause the harm (R v White).
- Legal Cause: - This states whether the defendant’s actions (omissions) was more than the minimal (de minimus) cause of the death/injury, and it must include the operating and substantial cause of death (R v Kimsey).
- New Intervening Act (an act of a third party, the victim’s own act or & a natural but unpredictable event).
Thin Skull (D must “take your victim as you find them”). This means that D is liable for the full extent of their actions, even if the victim has suffered consequences that are worse than what would be normally suffered due to some other pre-existing factors.
Mens Rea: - The defendant must have the mens rea for whichever the unlawful act caused death.
The defendant needs mens rea for the unlawful act - it doesn’t need to intend or foresee death as a possible outcome.
DPP V Newbury & Jones (1976): - There is no need to prove the defendant foresee harm. They only need to fulfil the mens rea of original lawful act.
R v Lamb: - If the defendant doesn’t have the mens rea of the unlawful act, they cannot be found guilty of UAM.
Transferred Malice: - This means unlawful act it doesn’t need to be aimed at the victim. It is aimed at another person, the mens rea transfers from them to the victim, D will be found guilty.
