Involuntary manslaughter - unlawful act manslaughter Flashcards
What type of law is UAM
common law
what are the four elements of the offence ( as well as definition )
- D must do an unlawful act
- the act must be dangerous on an objective test
- the act must cause death
- D must have MR to do unlawful act.
‘Unlawful Act’
must be against criminal law, for liability to arise, the prosecution must prove that the unlawful act has taken place.
What happened in Franklin
D threw box of pier, killing swimmer. Not enough for unlawful act (no criminal damage)
What happened in Lamb
D and V playing with revolver. Both did not believe it would fire. D pulled trigger, V was shot and died. D’s act was not an unlawful one (no assault)
What happened in Lowe
D neglected baby son in which he died. CA held that an omission is not enough for unlawful act manslaughter as it MUST BE AN ACT
What happened in Khan and Khan
D’s supplied V with heroin, V injected herself and went into a coma. D left V’s flat and V died later. D’s could not claim UAM because D’s had not done an unlawful act merely omitted to get help for her.
‘Unlawful act must be dangerous’
CHURCH -
D dumped body of V into river after assaulting her. V not dead (D thought V was), V drowned.
When assessing whether the act is dangerous, circumstances known to D are relevant as well as the risk of some harm that would have been known by a ‘sober and reasonable person’ - D guilty of manslaughter
WHat happened in Larkin
D threatened A with open razor, A’s partner, V, fell on razor cutting her throat and died.
CA held D guilty of UAM, threatening A was an assault and dangerous even if D did not ‘mean’ to harm V.
what happened in Mitchell
D tried to push in post office queue. D punched old man who fell backward to V. V fell and later died. D guilty of UAM, punching man was unlawful and caused V’s death
What happened in JM and SM
Brothers involved in fight in night club. Doorman V died from rupture of artery due to weakness - rare injury to have occurred.
CA held that test for danger is whether a sober + reasonable person would foresee the risk of some harm., did not matter if they did not foresee the particular type of harm that occured.
‘Unlawful act must cause death’
Causation
but what about drugs?
Cato - D and V prepared heroin/water injection. They injected each other and V died. D injected V so he was help liable for UAM
What happened in Dalby
D supplied drugs, V injected herself with it and died. CA held D not guilty of UAM - V’s voluntary act had led her to her death.
what happened in kennedy
D filled and supplied V with heroin syringe. V injected and died
HL held D did not do anything unlawful that caused V’s death.
V’s action (injecting herself) broke the chain of causation
‘D must have MR for the unlawful act’
Established in Newbury and Jones -
D’s (15 y o boys) pushed paving slab from bridge to railway line. Hit and killed guard. Claimed that they did not know it was dangerous. HL said that it is not necessary to foresee the harm caused. the unlawful act was Criminal damage for which recklessness is enough
