Manslaughter

Question 1

Types of manslaughter

Answer 1

• Unlawful Act Manslaughter
• Reckless Act Manslaughter
• Gross Negligence Manslaughter

Question 2

Unlawful Act Manslaughter

Answer 2

The defendant is carrying out an unlawful act that is likely to cause some injury to another person

Question 3

Gross Negligence Manslaughter

Answer 3

The defendant is conducting a lawful activity but being negligent

Question 4

Reckless Manslaughter

Answer 4

The defendant consciously thinks about the risk of harm but goes ahead with it anyway.

Question 5

Definition of UAM

Answer 5

DPP v Newbury and Jones

• where the defendant intentionally commits an act which is
• unlawful
• dangerous and
• causes the death of the victim.

Question 6

The act must be intentional

Answer 6

• intention to do the act itself, not cause the outcome
• must be a positive act, not an omission (R v Lowe)
• Cannot be based on negligence, must be a criminal act (Andrews v DPP)

Question 7

It must be a positive act, not an omission

Answer 7

R v Lowe

Question 8

UAM cannot be based on negligence, it must be a criminal act

Answer 8

Andrews v DPP

Question 9

The act must be unlawful

Answer 9

It must be a crime, not just a tort (R v Franklin)

Question 10

All AR and MR elements of the unlawful act must be made out

Answer 10

R v Lamb

- the same defence to that crime apply (R v Scarlett)

Question 11

the unlawful act can be one of strict liability

Answer 11

R v Andrews

Question 12

The crime need not be aimed at the ultimate victim

Answer 12

R v Larkin

Question 13

The act must be dangerous

Answer 13

The act will be dangerous if the ‘reasonable man’ foresees the risk of some harm, not necessarily the risk of serious harm.

Question 14

The dangerous act requires that D foresaw that physical harm might occur

Answer 14

R v Dawson

Question 15

The jury will take into account facts that make the act dangerous that are known to the defendant or would be obvious to the reasonable person

Answer 15

Dawson - heart attack (not known)

Watson - frail old man (known)

Question 16

It would not be recognised by the sober and reasonable bystander that an apparently 15 yo girl was going to suffer shock

Answer 16

Dyson LJ in Carey

- Physical harm in the form of shock would be left to the jury (J v JM and SM)

Question 17

All that that the prosecution need to show in UAM

Answer 17

• the MR of the criminal act
• D had foreseen the consequences of the criminal act
  R v JF and NE

Question 18

The act must cause the death

Answer 18

Lord Lay in Goodfellow

- it’s not about a direct act i.e. no NAI between the unlawful act and the death

Question 19

A victim ending their own life as a result of D’s action is a free and unfettered violation unless it is in the range of reasonably foreseeable responses

Answer 19

Wallace

Question 20

A Novus Actus Interveniens must be

Answer 20

a free, deliberate and informed act

Question 21

A pregnant mother was stabbed and the baby dies 180 days later. It was found that the D’s actions caused the death of the baby.

Answer 21

Att-Gen Ref 1994

Question 22

Where d supplies V with heroin

Answer 22

The unlawful act is s. 23 Offences against the Person Act 1861 - administering poison so as to endanger life.
NOT
Misuse of Drugs act 1971 - supply of a controlled drug R v Kennedy

Question 23

The AR for s. 23 OAP

Answer 23

administering or causing the administration of another to take poisonous or noxious substances
i.e. injecting someone with heroin would be administering a poison.

Question 24

Supplying heroin, where the V injects himslef

Answer 24

R v Kennedy No.2

Supplying drugs to someone who later dies is not involuntary manslaughter.

Question 25

Where the D helps V to 'raise a vein' - joint administration

Answer 25

``` Depends of the degree of assistance R v Byram - liability for joint administration R v Evans - not liable for UAM (but was liable for GNM for not calling an ambulance) ```

Question 26

Gross Negligence Manslaughter requirements:

Answer 26

R v Rose: - D must owe a duty of care - must have breached that duty - risk of death was reasonably foreseeable from the breach - the breach must have caused V's death - that breach must amount to gross negligence

Question 27

Owing a duty of care to V

Answer 27

- normal rules of negligence apply (R v Adomako) - ex turpi does not apply (R v Wacker) - liability for omission as well as comission

Question 28

Regarding reasonable foreseeability: The court is not allowed to take into account information that would have only been available following a breach of duty only information that is available at the time.

Answer 28

R v Rose

Question 29

Giving peanuts to a restaurant customer with an allergy was a breach of duty that caused death

Answer 29

Zaman

Question 30

Stepping back and watching a girl drown, then going to a bar and not calling the police immediately was a breach of duty.

Answer 30

Bowditch

Question 31

'Gross' negligence manslaughter

Answer 31

negligence to such a degree that it amounts to a crime against the state and deserving of punishment (Bateman)

Question 32

Incompetent anaesthetist killing a patent accidentally was GNM

Answer 32

Adomake

Question 33

Patient dying from poor post-operative care was GNM

Answer 33

Misra and Srivastava

Question 34

Landlord failing to fix a known carbon monoxide leak and his tenant dying was GNM

Answer 34

Singh

Question 35

To amount to GNM in a medical context, the risk of death must be serious and obvious

Answer 35

not merely a remote possibility | R v Rudling

Question 36

Several acts can cumulatively constitute one act of gross negligence

Answer 36

Litchfield

Question 37

Expert evidence can assist the jury in reaching a decision in GNM, but whether the negligence amounts to gross is a question for the jury.

Answer 37

R v Sellu

Question 38

D will be liable where he has personal responsibility, even if others are responsible

Answer 38

R v Singh

Question 39

Reckless Manslaughter

Answer 39

If there is a high probability of death or serious injury (Hyams v DPP)

Question 40

Dragging the V behind a car when they were half in was deemed reckless as there was an awareness of the risk

Answer 40

Lidar