Voluntary Manslaughter

Question 1

What is voluntary manslaughter?

Answer 1

Where the defendant has satisfied the actus reus and mens rea of murder but murder conviction is reduced to voluntary manslaughter by way of diminished responsibility or loss of control

Question 2

What is the effect at sentencing if the defendant is found guilty of voluntary manslaughter?

Answer 2

The defendant is not given a mandatory life sentence but the judge has discretion in sentencing

Question 3

Are diminished responsibility and loss of control full or partial defences?

Answer 3

Partial defences

Question 4

Is diminished responsibility available for attempted murder?

Answer 4

No

Question 5

Who has the burden in relation to diminished responsibility?

Answer 5

The defence must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant was acting under diminished responsibility

Question 6

What four elements must be present for there to be a successful defence of diminished responsibility?

Answer 6

• D must have an abnormality of mental functioning
• that abnormality of mental functioning must arise from a recognised medical condition
• that abnormality of mental functioning must have substantially impaired the defendant’s ability to understand the nature of their conduct, form a rational judgment and/or exercise self-control
• that abnormality of mental functioning must provide an explanation for D’s conduct

Question 7

What is an abnormality of mental functioning for diminished responsibility?

Answer 7

Must be a state of mind so different form that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal

Question 8

What does it mean that the abnormality of mental functioning must arise from a recognised medical condition for diminished responsibility?

Answer 8

Must come from recognised medical condition and not something else such a hatred, jealousy or bad temper

Question 9

Can the abnormality of mental functioning arise from an undiagnosed medical problem for diminished responsibility?

Answer 9

Yes

Question 10

When will alcohol problems amount to an abnormality of mental functioning for diminished responsibility?

Answer 10

When the problem is alcohol dependency syndrome

Frequent binge drinking or one-off intoxication not enough

Question 11

What will amount to a substantial impairment of d’s ability for diminished responsibility?

Answer 11

When D cannot do one of the following:

• understand the nature of their conduct
• form a rational judgment
• exercise self-control

Question 12

In terms of defence of diminished responsibility, what does ‘substantial’ in the terms of ‘substantial impairment’ mean?

Answer 12

Substantial should be given its ordinary meaning

Question 13

When will the defendant’s act provide an explanation for D’s conduct for diminished responsibility?

Answer 13

When it causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing, D to carry out that conduct.

Need not be the only cause.

Question 14

What role do medical experts play in the defence of diminished responsibility?

Answer 14

As all four elements of defence are concerned with psychiatric matters, evidence for medical experts may be highly persuasive.

If medical evidence presents that all four elements of defence are satisfied and that is uncontested, then judge should remove murder charge from jury/

Question 15

Who bears the burden in relation to the defence of loss of control?

Answer 15

Once raised, it is for the prosecution to to prove that not all elements of the defence are present for it to fail

Question 16

Who decides if the defence of loss of control can go to the jury?

Answer 16

The judge

Question 17

What are the three elements for loss of control?

Answer 17

• there must be a loss of control
• there must be a qualifying trigger
• a person of D’s sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way

Question 18

What is required for there to be ‘loss of control’?

Answer 18

The defendant’s act or omission in killing must have resulted from loss of control.

Defendant’s must be unable to restrain themselves.

Must be more than loss of temper.

Question 19

What impact will timing have in deciding whether ‘loss of control’ element is present?

Answer 19

Whilst no requirement for loss of control to be sudden, longer delay between provocation and killing makes it less likely for there to be loss of control.

Any premeditation or considered desire for revenge will prevent defence from running

Question 20

What must the link between the qualifying trigger and the loss of control be for loss of control defence?

Answer 20

The qualifying trigger must be identified as the cause of loss of control

Question 21

What two potential triggers are there for the loss of control defence?

Answer 21

• fear trigger
• anger trigger

Question 22

What fear must be present for the fear trigger for loss of control?

Answer 22

There must be fear of serious violence.

Cannot be used if D incited violence

Question 23

What three elements must be present for the anger trigger for loss of control defence?

Answer 23

• things said or done
• constitute circumstances of an extremely grave nature
• caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged

Question 24

When can D not rely on the anger trigger for loss of control defence?

Answer 24

When D incited the anger as an excuse to use violence

When the thing said/done constituted sexual infidelity

Question 25

What will amount to circumstances of an extremely grave nature for loss of control defence?

Answer 25

• to be determined objectively
• will be unusual circumstances that go beyond the usual trials and disappointments of life
• must be more than trivial

Question 26

What will amount to D having a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged for loss of control defence?

Answer 26

Normal person in contemporary Britain would have felt seriously wronged in the same situation

Question 27

What is the normal person test for loss of control defence??

Answer 27

Objective test, assessing whether a normal person might have done what the defendant did or something similar in the circumstances

Question 28

What levels of tolerance and restraint will the normal person have for loss of control defence?

Answer 28

They will have ordinary powers of tolerance and self-restraint

Question 29

What characteristics of the defendant will the jury be unlikely to take into account when considering the normal person test for loss of control defence?

Answer 29

Jury will not be allowed to take into account any characteristics or circumstances that would affect normal tolerance and ability to exercise restraint.

Likely to be excluded:

• bad temper
• intoxication
• extreme sensitivity
• post-traumatic stress disorder
• personality disorder

Question 30

Under what circumstances will the defence of loss of control not be available?

Answer 30

• where it stems from a considered desire for revenge
• where the qualifying trigger was created by D for the excuse of using violence
• where the thing said or done constituted sexual infidelity
• where the case is one of attempted murder

Question 31

When will sexual infidelity be admissible for loss of control defence?

Answer 31

Where there is another admissible qualifying trigger that is related to sexual infidelity and that it is necessary for the jury to know about the infidelity so they have the ‘whole story’

Question 32

Can intoxication form a defence to murder?

Answer 32

Possible - if it negates mens rea ie due to intoxication the defendant did not form the mens rea of intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to the victim

Question 33

What effect will intoxication have on defence of loss of control?

Answer 33

Defence is still available if D can show that sober individual in D’s circumstances with normal levels of tolerance and self-restraint might have behaved in the same way as the defendant confronted by the relevant qualifying trigger.

Question 34

When will intoxication be taken into account in loss of control defence?

Answer 34

When there is a connection between said or done which make up the qualifying trigger

Eg when the defendant is taunted about his intoxication, then the jury can take that intoxication into account in assessing the gravity of the qualifying trigger

Question 35

Can voluntary intoxication alone be relied upon to found the defence of diminished responsibility?

Answer 35

No

Question 36

What is the effect of the defendant being voluntary intoxicated and having an abnormality of mental functioning for defence of diminished responsibility?

Answer 36

Diminished responsibility defence still available provided that all the requirements are met.

Will not be denied defence just because not sober.

Question 37

What is the effect of alcohol dependency syndrome being the abnormality of mental functioning for defence of diminished responsibility?

Answer 37

• D must have an AMF at the time of the killing due to ADS. Severity and extent of ADS should be considered
• AMF must arise from a recognised medical condition - ADS
• AMF must have substantially impaired the defendant’s ability to do one of the things in s 2(1A)
• AMF must provide an explanation for D’s conduct even if it is not the only cause