unlawful act manslaughter Flashcards
involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter definition
Unlawfully killing where D doesn’t intend to kill or cause GBH
Unlawful act manslaughter definition
D has done a dangerous unlawful act that caused the death
makes D liable even if they didn’t realize death/injury may occur
Elements of UAM
- unlawful act
- dangerous
- causation
- MR
- Unlawful act
must be a criminal offence, not a civil wrong - R V Franklin
- arson (R V waton)
- burglary (R V Goodfellow)
- criminal damage (DPP V Newbury and Jones)
must be an act, not an omission - R V Lowe (neglect of son, conviction quashed for UAM)
unlawful act must have caused the death - R V Lamb (didn’t realize barrel had turned, V didn’t apprehend violence so no UAM)
must be a criminal offence, not a civil wrong
R V Franklin
arson
R V waton
burglary
R V Goodfellow
criminal damage
R v Newbury and Jones
- Dangerous
objective test set out in Church 1966:
“sober and reasonable person to recognize at least the risk of some harm, not serious harm”
risk only needs to be some harm - Larkin (woman falls on open blade)
- R V JM and SM (brothers fighting bouncer)
dangerous act doesnt have to be aimed at V - R V mitchell
dangerous act can be aimed at property - R V Goodfellow
Dnagerous act must be physical har, not enoigh to frighten someone - R v Dawson
VS
Watson - where reasonable person would be aware of V’s fraility, they will be liable
Church 1966
set out objective test for dangerous:
sober and reasonable person would recognize at least the risk of some harm, not serious harm”
R v Larkin
Only needs to be the risk of some harm
D threatened man with open cut razor, woman tried to intervene but fell on blade
dangerous act was likely to injure someone
R V Mitchell
Dangerous act doesnt have to be aimed at V
fight broke out in post office, knocked over old lady, died from injuries
R V Goodfellow
dangerous act can be aimed a property
set fire to council flat so wouldn’t get rehoused, killed wife and woman
R V Dawson
Dangerous act must be physical harm, not enough to frighten someone
conviction quashed even though petrol station attendant died from heart attack during attempted robbery
Watson (in contrast to Dawson)
Elderly man died from HA 90 mins after being physically abused in an attempted burglary ( D would foresee the risk of harm as aware of frailty so liable)
- Causation - Substantial cause of death
normal rules apply
- factual
-legal
-novus actus intervenus
Coricon-Auguiste
Sohid
AG’s ref 4
R V kennedy
Cato
Coricon-Auguiste
threw air bomb firework into crowed busstation, elderly woman knocked over in the rush, later died from head injuries
Sohid
D part of group who attacked V at trainstaion, ended up on track with V, other members of the group prevented V from getting back up on platform, killed by train
AG’s Ref 4
in fight, gf pushed over railing - D thoight she was dead, pulled her body by a rope and cut her up to dispose her - onlt convicted of manslaughter as couldnt e proven that the fall actually caused the death
R V Kennedy
self administering drug = no causation, intervening act
D filled syringe with heroin at V’s request, V injected themselves, later died
conviction quashed as V’s own voluntary act broke the chain of causation
Cato (in contrast with R V Kennedy)
D administered drugs to V = no break in causation, so UAM still present
Mens Rea of UAM
MR for the unlawful act, not necessary for D to realize the risk of injury or death
e.g. if battery is the unlawful act = MR is intention/recklessness as to application of force
R V Newbury and Jones
R V Newbury and Jones (MR)
2 15yr old boys threw paving slab off brine as train approach, killed the train guard
conviction upheld as didn’t need to foresee risk of death
