manslaughter cases Flashcards
za
R v Lamb (1967)
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: messed around with a loaded revolver and ended up killing his friend when not realising a bullet had to be turned to come out when pointing a gun at friend
sig: D was held that he hadn’t done the unlawful criminal act, as the pointing the gun at the friend was not assault as the friend didn’t fear any violence from Lamb
R v Lowe (1973)
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: D convicted of wilfully neglecting baby son and manslaughter. Trial judge directed jury that if D guilty of wilful neglect he would also be found guilty of manslaughter
sig: CA quashed conviction for mansalughter as it was not an unlawful positive act so couldn’t be found guilty
R v Mitchell
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: D pushed an elderly man in post office queue, causing man to fall onto elderly lady who later died
sig: Transferred malice - D’s acts were direct cause of death and V’s fall was forseeable so din’t break chain
R v Goodfellow
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: D set fire to council flat to try get a new one, but didn’t realise his wife and child and another person were still in there so they died.
sig: act of mansalughter can be aimed at property
R v JM & SM
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
-showing that you don’t need to forsee the actual harm
sum: had a fight with 2 doormen in nightclub, during fight V (1 doorman) collapsed and died due to loss of blood after renal artery ruptured
sig: court stated it isn’t required to forsee any actual harm but forsee the risk of some harm
R v Kennedy
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: D supplied heroin to the victim, who then injected himself and died from choking on his vomit
sig: V’s self injection was an intervening act that broke chain of causation
R v Newbury & Jones
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: Two 15-year-old boys pushed a paving stone off a bridge and into the path of an oncoming train, killing the guard.
sig: showed that D needs the MR for the unlawful act even if they don’t recognise it as dangerous or didn’t intend to cause harm
R v White
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: D poisoned V’s drink but died of heart attack before drinking
sig: factual causation must be satisfied, ‘but for’ test not satisfied as D wasn’t factual cause of death
R v Cheshire
-involuntary manslaughter
-unlwaful act manslaughter
sum: V shot in thigh and stomach, trouble breathing so given tracheotomy but had complications doctors didn’t notice so died
sig: act was more than a minimal cause of death (legal causation) so chain of causation wasn’t broken
R v Adomako (1994)
- involuntary mansalughter
- gross negligence mansalughter
sig: an anaesthesist failed to notice that the patients oxygen supply tube had been cut off and so they suffered a heart attack and lack of oxygen caused V to suffer brain damage that caused death.
sum: convicted of gross negligence mansalughter as D had a contractual duty to care for V’s breathing supply and doctors gave evidence that a competant anaethesist would have noticed in 15secs not 13mins so D’s failure to react was abysmal.
R v Broughton (2020)
- involuntary mansalughter
- gross negligence mansalughter (GNM)
sum: at music festival D supplied drugs to gf and failed to get her help as he watched her slowly deterioate
sig: GNM in failing to act to get medical attention after supplying the drugs that created the situation, however “but for” factual test not satisfied as may have died anyway due to the dangerous nature of the drugs
