unlawful act manslaughter Flashcards
franklin
D threw a box off a pier in the sea , it hit V on the head who died. D was not convicted of unlawful act manslaughter , as his action was not a crime
larkin
D threatened a man with a cut throat razor. the mans mistress tried to intervene but because she was drunk , she fell onto the blade which cut her throat and killed her . D was convicted of unlawful act manslaughter-D committed the crime of assault on the man
mitchell
D tried to jump the queue in a busy post office . another man objected and D hit him , causing him to fall against several people, including an elderly women who suffered a broken femur and died in hospital a few days later . D convicted of unlawful act manslaughter
lowe
D, of low intelligence, failed to call the doctor when his nine-week-old child became ill. the child died 10 days later. D was found guilty of neglect NOT unlawful act manslaughter as his failure to call a doctor was an omission - not a positive unlawful act
lamb
the defendant killed the victim by firing a gun at him as a joke . both D and V thought the gun was unloaded, and they were just playing around. there was no AR or MR for assault so no conviction of unlawful act manslaughter
goodfellow
D decided to set fire to his council flat so he would be re-housed. his wife, son and another woman died in the fire. he intended arson , and convicted of unlawful act manslaughter , even though he did not intend or foresee any harm
dawson
the defendants robbed the victims petrol station wearing masks and armed with a replica firearm. when the victims ousted the alarm, they fled . soon after ,the victim who had a severe heart conduction,died of a heart attack. unlawful act was not dangerous from an objective point if view as there was no risk of physical harm , no conviction of unlawful act manslaughter
watson
2 defendants threw a brick though a window of a property and entered it intending to steal. a frail 87 year old man confronted them, they physically abused him , and he died of a heart attack 90 minutes after. the act of burglary was dangerous as the condition of the man could be seen , so convicted of unlawful act manslaughter
church
The defendant took the victim to a van for sexual purposes. The victim mocked the defendant and slapped him. The defendant knocked the victim unconscious and unable to revive her he panicked and threw her into a river. The victim drowned and the defendant was convicted of unlawful act manslaughter – the criminal conduct was dangerous as the reasonable person could see the risk of some physical harm even if death was not reasonably foreseeable
JF and NE
Two teenagers lit a match, setting fire to a warehouse. They left once the fire took hold, and it spread to the basement, killing a homeless man. They were convicted, even though they said they didn’t know anyone was in the building. The court held that the reasonable person would foresee the risk of some physical harm
newbury and jones
Two teenage boys pushed a paving stone off a bridge on to the train below, causing the death of a guard. They were convicted of unlawful act manslaughter. They intended to do the criminal act of pushing the stone onto the train, and so had the mens rea for manslaughter even though they did not foresee any harm
kennedy
V asked D to supply him with heroin. D filled a syringe and gave it to the V, who injected himself and later died as a result. there was no conviction for unlawful act manslaughter as the injection was an intervening act that broke the chain of legal causation between the unlawful act and the death
corbett
The defendant had been out drinking with the victim, a man of low intelligence and suffering mental illness. They were both heavily intoxicated. The victim accidentally urinated on the defendant’s foot. The defendant chased the victim down the middle of a road and on catching him punched him and head butted him. The victim managed to run off, but tripped and landed in the gutter of the road. He sat up but had his head protruding into the road. He was then hit by a passing car which killed him. The victim’s response was reasonably foreseeable so the chain of causation was not broken, and the defendant was convicted of unlawful act manslaughter
Intro
-D may be liable for unlawful act (constructive) manslaughter, a type of involuntary manslaughter which is an unlawful killing where the defendant does not have the mens rea for murder (malice aforethought)
-There are 4 elements that must be satisfied
element one
-Firstly, there must be a positive and unlawful act by the defendant, which means a criminal offence, set out in Franklin, Larkin and Lamb, and not an omission, as in Lowe.
-The unlawful act need not be directed at the victim, as in Mitchell, and it need not be directed at a person, as in Goodfellow.
-Here [eg. D’s positive and unlawful criminal act is his assault on V when he puts V in fear of immediate unlawful force by threatening V with violence . IF RELEVANT: say that the act was not actually directed at V, or anyone in particular
