Murder II: Loss of Control/Diminished Responsibility Flashcards
What is the actus reus for murder?
- unlawful killing
- reasonable person in being
- under King’s peace
What is the mens rea for murder?
- intention to kill
- or cause GBH (R v Vickers)
When will the necessary direct intent for murder be found?
- when D’s purpose or objective in acting was death or GBH of victim
What may happen if D’s purpose in acting is something other than the death or GBH of the victim? What might happen in court?
- Woollin direction on oblique intent might be given to the jury
How does sentencing work with murder?
- mandatory life sentence
- Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965
- judge has no discretion other than recommending a minimum term
What two defences arise only in the relation to murder?
- loss of control
- diminished responsibility
Where is the authority for loss of control?
- s54(1) Coroners and Justice Act (CJA) 2009
How does the test for loss of control work?
D cannot be convicted if:
- Ds acts resulted from a loss of self-control AND
- the loss of self control had a qualifying trigger AND
- a reasonable person of D’s age and sex might have acted the same way in the same circumstances
Where does the burden of proof lie for LSC? What kind of a defence is it?
- burden of proof on prosecution to show it did not happen
- only a partial defence
What defines loss of self control?
- R v Richens
- doesn’t have to be total loss; D can know what they are doing but cannot restrain themself
- needs more than just losing temper
- need not be sudden
Where is the “qualifying trigger” defined?
- s55 CJA 2009
What are the possible qualifying triggers?
- loss of self control through fear of serious violence from V against D or another
OR - loss of self control due to things said or done in circumstances of an extremely grave nature that caused D to feel a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
OR - both
why might the ‘fear of serious harm’ qualifier have been introduced? Give an example case.
- where D is defending himself but uses unreasonable force to do so
- eg Tony Martin in R v Martin (Anthony)
What does “things said or done” mean in the context of s55 CJA 2009
actual events need to have happened. Circumstances are not enough - R v Acott
What does”caused D to feel a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged” mean in the context of s55 CJA 2009?
- ‘justifiable’ element is objectively judged
- trigger doesn’t have to be immediate but longer the delay before the act the greater chance D will have had time to consider their actions. R v Ahluwalia
When can the defence of LSC not be used?
1) in acts of considered revenge
2) if D created the qualifying trigger as an excuse to use violence himself
3) if the thing “said or done” constituted sexual infidelity
What case demonstrates that LSC cannot be used if it stems from an act of considered revenge? What happened?
- R v Ibrams and Gregory
- seven days between last act of bullying and the act in question.
Where is the law and case demonstrates that D cannot create the qualifying trigger in order to use violence himself?
- s55 (6) CJA 2009
- R v Johnson: Jury should have decided whether LSC could be applied even though D started the fight that led to the death
What three tests changed the law as to the “reasonable man” test for LSC?
- DPP v Camplin
- R v Smith (Morgan James)
- Attorney General for Jersey v Holley
What is the current position as to the “reasonable man” test for LSC? From where?
- 54(1)(c) CJA2009
- “all the defendant’s circumstances”
- wholly objective test
How will loss of control affect a charge of attempted murder?
From R v Campbell it is unlikely to be a defence to attempted murder
What three criteria need to be satisfied for diminished responsibilty to work in relation to murder?
abnormality of mental function which:
- arose from a recognised medical condition and
- which stopped D thinking normally and
- explains D’s actions or omissions
How does D’s mental function need to have been affected to consitute diminished responsibility?
ability to:
- understand nature of his actions
- form a rational judgement
- exercise self control
What is the effect if a defence of diminished responsibility is successfully argued?
murder charge reduced to manslaughter
Where does the definition of an ‘abnormality of mental functioning’come from?
R v Byrne
- a ‘state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal’.
How wide a definition is “arising from a recognised medical condition”? What kind of things have been accepted?
- very wide
- post-natal depression - R v Reynolds
- alcoholism - R v Tandy
How strong a causal link needs to be formed between the abnormality of D’s mental functioning and the killing?
- the abnormality of the mental function need not be the only cause, but a link must be established.
- R v Dietschmann
How do courts view Ds with mental abnormality who claim diminished responsibility for actions committed while they were intoxicated?
- R v Dietschmann
- jury must decide if despite drink
1) he was suffering from a mental abnormality and
2) this substantially impaired his mental responsiblity for his fatal acts
