Law Commissions Proposals & Government's response

Question 1

How did the Law Commission suggest that murder should be reformed?

Answer 1

by dividing it into two separate offences

first degree murder and second degree murder

Question 2

Under the Law Commissions proposal of dividing murder, what would first degree murder offences cover?

Answer 2

cases in which the defendant intended to kill and where they were aware that serious harm held a risk of death

Question 3

Under the Law Commissions proposal of dividing murder, what would second degree murder offences cover?

Answer 3

cases in which the defendant intended to do serious injury, but was not aware that there was a serious risk of death

Question 4

By dividing murder into two separate categories, where would mandatory life sentences apply?

Answer 4

only to first degree murder

Question 5

By dividing murder into two separate categories, where would a maximum sentences of life apply?

Answer 5

second degree murder

Question 6

In what year did the Government issue a consultation paper which rejected the Law Commissions proposal of completely reforming murder by making it a two-tier offence?

Answer 6

2008

Question 7

What was the only area where the government accepted that reform was needed?

Answer 7

the area regarding the lack of a defence for those who use excessive force in self defence

Question 8

Under what act was the defence for those who use excessive force in self defence implemented?

Answer 8

Coroners and Justice Act 2009

Question 9

Under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, what is there a defence for?

Answer 9

‘loss of control’ where D kills through loss of control due to fear of serious violence

Question 10

If the defence of ‘loss of control’ under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 is established what is the charge of murder reduced to?

Answer 10

manslaughter

Question 11

What would the defence of ‘loss of control’ under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 allow cases such as Martin 2002 and Clegg 1995 to have?

Answer 11

to have a partial defence to a charge of murder which could reduce the offence to manslaughter

Question 12

What does the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 not address the problems of? (4)

Answer 12

no intent to kill
the difficulty of the meaning of intention
the lack of a defence of duress
mandatory sentence

Question 13

Under the present law of Euthanasia, if D kills V because he or she can no longer bear to see V in pain, D is guilty of murder, normally serving a sentence of how many years?

Answer 13

15 years imprisonment

Question 14

What case is an example under Euthanasia which led to the imposition of a life sentence?

Answer 14

Inglis 2010

Question 15

What happened in the case of Inglis 2010?

Answer 15

D was mother of V who suffered catastrophic head injuries and needed long term dependant care. Tried to kill V to end misery but failed. Tried again and succeeded. Convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 5 years.

Question 16

D was mother of V who suffered catastrophic head injuries and needed long term dependant care. Tried to kill V to end misery but failed. Tried again and succeeded. Convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 5 years.
What case is this?

Answer 16

Inglis 2010

Question 17

What was the only concession made in Inglis 2010?

Answer 17

that the court could set a lower than normal minimum term of imprisonment before release on licence could be considered

Question 18

Why did the judges in Inglis 2010 set a lower than normal minimum term of imprisonment before release on licence could be considered?

Answer 18

as D was unlikely to be a dangerous person, and os more discretion was taken

Question 19

In what country are doctors allowed to end the life of terminally ill patients?

Answer 19

Netherlands

Question 20

What case is an example of when doctors in the UK have withdrawn treatment from patients in certain situations?

Answer 20

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993

Question 21

What happened in the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993?

Answer 21

Bland had been suffocated in Hillsborough disaster. In a persistent vegetative state for 3 years. Doctors applied for permission to stop feeding him.
Quality of life was considered, seen in the best interests of the patient to discontinue life support

Question 22

V had been suffocated in Hillsborough disaster. In a persistent vegetative state for 3 years. Doctors applied for permission to stop feeding him.
Quality of life was considered, seen in the best interests of the patient to discontinue life support
What case is this?

Answer 22

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993

Question 23

Although doctors are allowed to withdraw treatment if patient is in a persistent vegetative state, what are they not allowed to do?

Answer 23

not allowed to do anything positive to kill the patient

Question 24

Why can it be seen as more merciful to administer a drug which kills a patient painlessly?

Answer 24

as the case of Bland 1993 meant that the patient was starved to death rather than use of a drug

Question 25

The DPP are obliged by s.2 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 to issue a code for Crown Prosecutors which give guidance on what?

Answer 25

general principles to be used when deciding whether or not to prosecute for aiding and abetting suicide

Question 26

The DPP are obliged by what act to issue a code for Crown Prosecutors to give guidance on the general principles to be used when deciding whether or not to prosecute for aiding and abetting suicide

Answer 26

s.2 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985

Question 27

What happened in the case of R v DPP 2009?

Answer 27

Mrs Purdy suffered from a disease with no cure, knowing she would become severely disabled. She wanted to be able to travel when she got to a point her where her life was unbearable, but she would need help. She wanted to know whether this would mean her husband would be prosecuted for assisting her suicide. The HOL held that the DPP held no guidance on this point

Question 28

Mrs Purdy suffered from a disease with no cure, knowing she would become severely disabled. She wanted to be able to travel when she got to a point her where her life was unbearable, but she would need help. She wanted to know whether this would mean her husband would be prosecuted for assisting her suicide. The HOL held that the DPP held no guidance on this point
What case is this?

Answer 28

R v DPP 2009

Question 29

What has the DPP said regarding assisted suicide?

Answer 29

that each case had to be considered on its own facts and merits

Question 30

What happened in the case of R v DPP 2013?

Answer 30

there was 3 applications which sought a judicial declaration. 2 were so several disabled that they could not even commit suicide with assurance, only y voluntary euthanasia. They contended that common law should recognise the defence of necessity, that they had a right to end their own lives under Art 8 of the ECHR. High court dismissed their applications, upheld by COA.

Question 31

there was 3 applications which sought a judicial declaration. 2 were so several disabled that they could not even commit suicide with assurance, only y voluntary euthanasia. They contended that common law should recognise the defence of necessity, that they had a right to end their own lives under Art 8 of the ECHR. High court dismissed their applications, upheld by COA.
1 applicant was allowed to appeal but the outcome was uncertain

What case is this?

Answer 31

R v DPP 2013