Unlawful Act Manslaughter Flashcards
R v Stone and Dobinson
There must be an act not an omission
R v Franklin
The act must be criminal not civil
R v Lamb
The act must be complete
DPP v Newbury and Jones
Do only needs the mens rea for the unlawful act - not for any harm or death
R v Mohan
D’s main aim or purpose is to bring about the consequence
R v Cunningham
D realises the risk, but carries on regardless
Mitchell
Mens rea can be transferred from an intended V to an actual V
R v Pagett
Uses the ‘but for’ test, where the consequence would not have happened but for D’s conduct
R v White
Uses the ‘but for’ test, where the consequence would have happened but for D’s conduct
R v Smith
Uses the ‘operative and substantial’ test, whereby D’s actions were significant in causing the consequence
R v Pagett (intervening act)
Acts of a third party will not break the chain of causation if they are reasonable and foreseeable
R v Jordan
Acts of a medical third party will break the chain of causation if they are unreasonable, unforeseeable and palpably wrong
R v Roberts
Acts of the victim will not break the chain of causation if they are reasonable and foreseeable
R v Williams
Acts of the victim will break the chain of causation if they are unreasonable and unforeseeable
R v Blaue
The Thin Skull Rule shows you must take your victim as you find them
R v Dear
Self neglect by V does not break the chain of causation
Cato
D causes V’s death
Kennedy
Self injecting causes V’s death
R v Church
An act is dangerous if the reasonable and sober person would realise risk of some physical harm as a result of it
Dawson
Emotional harm is not sufficient for this test, it must be physical harm
Watson
The reasonable person can be given any knowledge D would have gained when doing the unlawful act
R v JM and SM
D does not need to foresee the specific harm caused, just some physical harm of some kind
Goodfellow
The unlawful act can be aimed at property as long as the sober and reasonable person would realise it carried the risk of some physical harm to a person
R v Farnon and Ellis
D will be compared to a reasonable and sober person even if D is not
