Week 8 - VM - Diminished repsonsibility

Question 1

Where is the law for diminished responsibility from?

Answer 1

• used to be s2 of the Homicide Act 1957 -> amended by Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009

Question 2

Coroners and Justice Act 2009 on DR

Answer 2

2(1) A person (‘D’) who kills or is a party to the killing of another is not to be convicted of murder if D was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which—
(a) arose from a recognised medical condition,
(b) substantially impaired D’s ability to do one or more of the things mentioned in subsection (1A), and
(c) provides an explanation for D’s acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing.
(1A) Those things are—
(a) to understand the nature of D’s conduct.
(b) to form a rational judgement.
(c) to exercise self-control.

Question 3

What are the elements on DR?

Answer 3

1 - an abnormality of mental functioning.
2 - Arising from a recognised medical conditions
3 - which sustainably impaired D’s ability to
1 - understand the nature of their conduct and/or
2 - to form a rations judgement and/or
3 - exercise control.
4 - wither it was a cause or a contributory cause to the abnormality of mental functioning.

Question 4

Procedure for using the defence

Answer 4

• burden of proof lies with D on a balance of probabilities (Lambert 2001)
• can plead DR Evan if deny the killing (Curran 2021)
• if prosecution uncontested then judge may withdraw murder form the jury.

Question 5

1 - Abnormality of mental functioning

Answer 5

• relies on expert evidence to show how D’s mental functioning deviated from that of a normal person

Question 6

2 - Arising form a recognised medical condition

Answer 6

• harder to excuse on mercy-killing, assisted suicide or domestic abuse.
• reference to ICD-10 and DMS -5
• Vinagre (1979) - Othello Complex
• Condition can be physical, psychiatric or psychological
  Temporary medical conditions may suffice (Dowds)
  -no threshold of seriousness
• some excluded conditions e.g., developmental immaturity (which may sometimes come with another conditions).

Question 6

Substantially impaired D’s mental ability

Answer 6

1 - understand the nature of their conduct
- law commission e.g., child with mental illness who plays violent games and kills in the belief they will regenerate.
- D may understand the physical dynamics but not the impact on V.
2 - to form a rational judgement
- Law commission – e.g. where those abused kill their abusers as he pressure of the circumstances may substantially impair D’s ability to make rational choices
3 - exercise control

Question 7

Substantial impairment - cases

Answer 7

• Golds [2016] UKSC 61 - ‘whilst the impairment must indeed pass the merely trivial before it need be considered, it is not the law that any impairment beyond the trivial will suffice’. Jury couldn’t ordinarily be directed in the meaning of substantially, normal meaning f the word.
• Conroy [2017] - the ability to form a rational judgement based on D’s reasoning power and not only the resulting choice.
  -Blackmann [2017] - self-control may be sufficiently impaired even where no loss of self-control is externally discernible.

Question 8

Abnormality must explain the killing

Answer 8

• There must be a causal link between D’s abnormality and D’s act/omission in the killing.
  -It need not be the sole cause
  -explanation will be found it if causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing D to carry out the conduct.

Question 9

Causing the killing - Voluntary intoxication

Answer 9

• D cannot rely on defence where no medical condition other than acute intoxication exists (Kay)
• If D suffers form a recognised medical condition other than alcohol dependence and is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of thew killing - need to prove abnormality comes from conditions and not intox. (Dietschmann 2003)(Joyce)
• If D suffers from a recognised medical condition in the form of alcohol dependancy syndrome and is intoxicated at the time of killing this could qualify as a medical condition. (Wood).