Voluntary Manslaghter Flashcards
What are the two defences to murder for voluntary manslaughter?
- Diminished responsibility.
- Loss of control.
What does converting murder to voluntary manslaughter achieve?
It gives judges discretion over sentencing instead of imposing a mandatory life sentence.
What is the governing law for loss of control?
s54 and s55 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
What must a defendant demonstrate for loss of control?
- Loss of self-control.
- Loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger.
- A person of the same sex and age, with normal tolerance and in similar circumstances, might behave similarly.
What does the jury decide if the judge allows the defence of loss of control?
- Whether the defendant lost their ability to maintain actions in line with considered judgment.
- Whether the defendant lost their normal powers of reasoning.
- Whether the defendant’s behaviour was atypical or out of character.
What is the test for establishing loss of self-control under s54(1)(a)?
A subjective test.
Does loss of control need to be sudden?
No, per s54(2).
What case law explains loss of control not needing to be sudden?
R v Dawes: ‘The law accepts that different individuals react differently and may not respond immediately.’
What is the first qualifying trigger for loss of control?
Fear of serious violence (s55(3)).
What are the conditions for fear of serious violence as a qualifying trigger?
- Genuine fear of serious violence against the defendant or another person.
- No need to prove the fear was reasonable.
- Cannot be relied upon if the defendant incited violence (s55(6)(a)).
What is the second qualifying trigger for loss of control?
Serious provocation (s55(4)).
What constitutes serious provocation?
- An act or omission of an extremely grave character.
- Caused the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being wronged.
What case law applies to serious provocation?
R v Zebedee.
How is serious provocation assessed?
Objectively: A person of the defendant’s sex and age, with normal tolerance, might have acted similarly.
Short temper is not considered.
When can sexual infidelity be considered in loss of control?
It may be considered as part of background context (Clinton).
What is the governing law for diminished responsibility?
s52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
What is the four-stage test for diminished responsibility?
- Was the defendant suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning?
- Did it arise from a recognised mental condition?
- Did it substantially impair the defendant’s ability to:
- Form rational judgments.
- Exercise self-control.
- Does it explain their behaviour?
Where does the burden of proof lie in diminished responsibility?
On the defendant, on a balance of probabilities.
What does the defence of diminished responsibility acknowledge?
The defendant has the actus reus but not the mens rea of the crime.
What does ‘abnormality of mental functioning’ assess?
It is a question of fact, not medicine. It examines the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the killing (R v Byrne).
What does recognised medical condition (s2(1)(a)) cover?
- Includes all conditions listed by the World Health Organisation.
- Must exist at the time of the killing, supported by medical evidence.
- R v Dowds: Acute intoxication is a recognised condition but does not qualify as a defence.
What must be proved under substantial impairment (s2(1)(b))?
The abnormality substantially impaired the defendant’s mind in one of three ways:
1. Understanding the nature of their conduct.
2. Forming a rational judgment.
3. Exercising self-control.
What is the requirement for causation in diminished responsibility?
The abnormality of mental functioning must be a cause or contributory cause of the act (amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009).
What does R v Di Duca state about intoxication and diminished responsibility?
The immediate effects of drugs and alcohol do not amount to an abnormality of mental functioning.
Can transient states of intoxication qualify for diminished responsibility?
No, short-term states of intoxication are not valid abnormalities.
How should the jury approach a mental disorder and intoxication?
The jury must disregard intoxication when both are present.
Can alcoholism amount to an abnormality of mental functioning?
Yes, per R v Wood (2009), alcoholism may amount to an abnormality of mental functioning.
