voluntary manslaughter

Question 1

What is the definition of voluntary manslaughter?

Answer 1

voluntary manslaughter occurs where a defendant has the required actus reus and mens rea for murder but there

Question 2

What is the difference between voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter?

Answer 2

Voluntary manslaughter requires mens rea where as involuntary manslaughter only requires the actus reus

Question 3

What are the two main defences available for voluntary manslaughter?

Answer 3

• Loss of control

- Diminished responsibility

Question 4

Summarise the defence of loss of control

Answer 4

-Was previously provocation
- Now under s54 and 55 corners and justice act 2009
- Requires 3 elements: 1. the d’s acts and omission’s in doing or omissions in being a party to the killing resulted from there loss of control
2 There was a qualifying trigger
3. A person of similar sex , age and a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint would have reacted in the same or similar way

Question 5

Explain the first element of loss of control

Answer 5

• The d must have suffered a loss of control at the time of the killing
• R V Jewell defined loss of control as a loss of the ability to act with considered judgment or normal powers of reasoning
• S.54(2) coorners and justice act 2009 states that it does not matter whether or not the loss of control was sudden

Question 6

Explain what is meant by a qualifying trigger

Answer 6

s. 55 corners and justice act suggests that loss of control is relevent if
s. 55(3). d feared serious violence from v
- s.55(4) if D’s loss of control was caused by things said or done which constituted circumstances of grave character or caused d to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged
- s55

Question 7

What does not constitute as a qualifying trigger?

Answer 7

1. if d used a fear of serious volence as an excuse to use more violence
2. A sense of feeling seriously wronged was not justifiable and D incited the thing said or done as an excuse to use violence
3. The thing said or done was sexual infidelity

Question 8

What case defined loss of control ?

Answer 8

R V Jewell

Question 9

Name some cases that do not constitute a fear of serious violence

Answer 9

• R V Dawes- killed a man for sexual infertility

Question 10

Give some case names of when loss of control could not be used

Answer 10

• R v DAWES- iritation does not constitute as a sense of being wronged
• R v Boyer - had no justifiable sense of being wronged
• R V Zebedee - could not demonstrate a qualifying trigger

Question 11

What is the significance of R V Clinton ?

Answer 11

• R V Clinton showed that while sexual infidelity cannot be used as a qualifying trigger there is still other factors that can determine a loss of control

Question 12

Explain what is meant by a person of ‘D’s same sex and age may have reacted in the same or similar as the third element of loss of control.

Answer 12

-
R V Camplin .. which was further confirmed in the case of AG for Jersey v Holley that only age and sex were relevant when considering the objective standard of self control. Other characteristics were not relevan

Question 13

Give three evaluations of the loss of control

Answer 13

• e new defence is wider than the previous defence of provocation because there is no need for a sudden loss of control. It abolishes the rule in R v Duffy (1949) which said the loss of self-control must be sudden and temporary and if there was a delay or ti
• exual infidelity is specifically excluded as a qualifying trigger by the 2009 Act and as the Act’s explanatory notes say the effect of this is that if a person kills another because they have been unfaithful he/she will not be able to claim the defence.

Question 14

What is mean by diminished responsibility

Answer 14

This is a form of voluntary manslaughter which acts as a partial defence to murder where successfully pleaded a defendant is convicted of manslaughter and not murder.

Question 15

What is the old definition of diminished responsibility ?

Answer 15

Under s.2 Homicide Act 1957 it was refereed to as an abnormality of the mind

Question 16

What us the new definition and statue of diminished responsibility

Answer 16

• s.52 Coroners and Justice Act 2009 defines diminished responsibility as abnormality of mental functioning

Question 17

What does s52 of the coorners and justice act 2009 state about diminished responsibility ?

Answer 17

-s52 CJA 2009 states that a person who kills or is a party to the killing of another is not to be convicted or murder if they were suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which:

• arose from a recognised medical condition
• substantially impaired the D’s ability to understand the nature of his conduct or form a rational judgement or exercise self control
• and explains ds acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing

Question 18

What case can be used to show abnormality of mental functioning ?

Answer 18

R V Bryne -he was a sexual psychopath that suffered from sexual desires he could not control
- the court held that abnormality of mind meant ‘a state of mind so different from that of an ordinary person that the reasonable man would term it to be abnormal.’ An objective test.

Question 19

Name a case that shows the abnormality of the mind caused by a recognised medical condition

Answer 19

R V Osbourne- although he suffered from a recognised medical condition did not substantially impair his mental responsibility for his actions.