Voluntary Manslaughter BASICS Flashcards

1
Q

What is loss of control?

A
  • Special and partial defence to a charge of murder, where D can show they lacked MR due to LOC.
  • Replaces previous defence of provocation
  • Found under s.54 Coroners and justice act 2009
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Under what act is LOC found?

A

s. 54 Coroner and Justice act 2009

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are the 3 elements under CJA 2009?

A
  1. Loss of self control
  2. Must be a qualifying trigger
  3. Would Someone of the same sex/age would react in a similar way as D
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Outline element 1. Loss of self control

A

D must prove they have lost control but this does not have to be sudden.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the 3 Key cases in 1. Loss of self control?

A

R v Duffy - No cooling or planning time
R v Alhuwalia - Application case
Thornton - D had sharpened a knife, suggesting planning time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What section of the CJA 2009 sets out the main qualifying triggers?

A

s.55 of CJA 2009

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the 2 main qualifying triggers?

A
  1. D’s fear of serious violence from V against D or another identified person.
  2. Things said or done which…
    a. Constitute circumstances of extremely grave character or
    b. Caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Which case relates to qualifiying trigger 1. Fear ?

A

This is where the D acts in fear of serious violence
R v Martin - No fear of serious violence, so cant use defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Which 2 cases relate to qualifying trigger 2 . Things said or done?

A

R v Hatter - Part A and B are judged objectively.
- Hatter stabbed wife in her chest as she had cheated on him - the breakdown of relationships will not be considered as a justifiable sense of being wronged.

R v Doughty - Killed his son by throwing him at a wall because it wouldnt stop crying.
- Although this can be considered things done, it didnt show a justifibale sense of being seriously wronged.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are 2 things which are not triggers?

Include sections

A
  1. Sexual infidelity - cheating
    - S.54(3) states it cannot be a qualifying trigger.
  2. If D acted in desire for revenge then by Virtue of s.54(4) this cannot be a qualifying trigger.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What case said if there has been a cumulative loss of control, sexual infidelity may be considered?

A

R v Clinton - D killed his wife as she cheated on him, provocated him, humilitaed him and taunted him about suicide.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Which case states revenge cannot be a qualifying trigger?

A

R v Ibrhams Gregory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the 3rd element of LOC?

A

Would someone of the same sex and age react in the same way?

The 2009 act requires whichever QT is relied on it is necessary for D to show that a person of the same sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint and in the same circumstances as D, might have reacted in the same way.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

The 2009 act requires whichever QT is relied on it is necessary for D to show that a person of the same _____ and age with a normal degree of ____ and self restraint and in the same circumstances as D, might have reacted in the ___.

A

Sex
Tolerance
Same way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is element 3 similar to?

Old common law

A

It is similar to the old common law test in DPP v Camplain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case states other illnesses may be taken into account in Element 3?

A

R v gregson

17
Q

What will happen if the jury consider a normal person would not have reacted in the same way but may have lost control?

What case?

A

Defence will fail
As seen in R v Van Dongen