Unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter Flashcards
What is unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter?
the unlawful killing of a human being where the AR of murder has taken place but without the MR for murder
(therefore D does not have the intention (direct or oblique) to kill (express malice) or to cause really serious harm (implied malice) but still have MR for an underlying unlawful and dangerous act that causes the death of V
What is unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter offered referred to as?
Constructive manslaughter
What is the highest “person offence” that can be basis for UDA and why?
S.20 OAPA 1861
because if the prosecution can prove that D intended to cause really serious harm (aka S.18) but it leads to V’s death, this becomes implied malice aforethought and therefore support D being charged with murder e.g Vickers (D and old lady, D breaks into shop, V sees D so D hit and kicked the old lady who later dies from injuries)
What are the elements for UDA?
1) D must have committed an unlawful act (criminal- action and not an omission)
2) D must have the mens rea for the unlawful act (intent or recklessness)
3) The unlawful act must be dangerous (R.P pov)
4)The unlawful act must cause death (factual and legal causation)
What was confirmed in Franklin?
“The mere fact of a civil wrong committed by one person against another ought not to be used as ….a necessary step in a criminal cause”
What happened in Lamb?
=underlying offence not established means no possibility of UDA conviction
=D and V were playing with a revolver, both knew it was loaded but did not realise the cylinder revolved. D pointed gun at V and pulled the trigger, V died. However, CA found D not liable as the underlying crime (assault) could not be established as V did not apprehend any unlawful force and D did not intend or take a subjective risk to his action.
Can UDA be an omission, state a case example
=No (requires a positive act)
Lowe (D failed to call a doctor for his sick baby, D was convicted of neglecting his child and UDA manslaughter. However CA quashed UDA convicted confirming that it must be an act and if an omission it should be GN manslaughter.
Regarding Mens rea what must the prosecution prove?
D had MR for the underlying act (intention or recklessness) OR
No MR if underlying act is strict lability (confirmed in Andrews (2002)which involved the administration of prescription medication
Note- D does not need to prove MR in relation to the death, as it is not necessary for D to realise the act is unlawful or even dangerous= OBJECTIVELY ASSESSED
What happened in the case of Newbury and Jones?
Tow 15 year olds threw a paving slab off a railway bridge as train was approaching. It went through the glass window as the train was approaching and killed the guard. CA confirmed there was no requirement for D to foresee harm it is objectively judged, as per the case of Church.
How is the dangerousness of the underlying act assessed?
- Unlawful act must be something that “is likely to injure another person”, confirmed in Larkin and it must be objectively dangerous (from the pov of the reasonable bystander)
What happened in the case of Church?
D and V went to have sex in Ds van, a disagreement resulted in a fight ensuring where D knocked V unconscious and thought she was dead so dragged her body to a river where she later drowned.
Edmund Davies J- “the unlawful act must be such as all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise the risk of some harm, albeit not serious harm”
What type of harm must the R.P recognise?
=some physical harm
does not need to foresee the “type” of harm that results just that some physical harm was possible. Confirmed in R v JM and SM (fight between Ds and doormen, doormen collapsed and died due to a renal artery rupturing due to weakness in the artery wall. CA confirmed that the R.P only needs to forsee that some physical harm was possible, no need for the specific type.
HOWEVER, something that simply causes fear or apprehension is not enough e.g Dawson
(Three masked Ds attempted to steal from a petrol station they demanded money from V but did not touch him. V then died from a heart attack. Causing V fear was not an act which the reasonable person would have realised was likely to create a risk of physical injury. =not guilty of UDA manslaughter
When considering dangerousness what can the jury consider?
=pre-existing knowledge of the Ds and any knowledge the D acquires during the commission of the unlawful act as having such knowledge might make an act dangerous
What case confirmed that dangerousness included any pre-existing knowledge known to the D?
Bristow
V killed by being run over by Ds trying to escape after committing burglary. UDA convictions upheld as the reasonable bystander would recognise the risk of harm being caused by a person intervening at night with large vehicles and only one escape route. Treacy LJ “a particular burglary may be dangerous because of the circumstances surrounding its commission”
What was confirmed in Mitchell?
Dangerous acts need not be aimed at the V who dies.
(Post office queue, D, old man, women, pushed, died from injuries)
State a case that supports the premise that a dangerous act can be against property
Goodfellow
(D had been harassed by two men and wished to move from his council house. To get re-housed he deliberately set fire to his property but the fire got out of control and his wife, son and another lady died.
State the Key phrase to remember regarding dangerousness
Larkin - “….all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise… the risk of some (physical) harm”
What is the final stage to proving UDA manslaughter?
=causing the death (factual and legal causation)=create a casual link
But for- Pagett
De minimis- Kinsey
“Novus Actus interveniens”= break chain of causation e.g
By Victims actions- Dear vs Kennedy
By third party - Jordon (allergic reaction)
Natural events- Hart
What happened in Cato?
D injected V with drugs and V died. Therefore D convicted of UDA manslaughter
What happened in Kennedy?
On appeal, Hl quashed UDA conviction when D had prepared a heroin syringe and V self injected and died.
What sentence can someone get if convicted of UDA manslaughter?
Fully discretionary sentence (life= max)
