Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Voluntary
Manslaughter
- 3 special defences to
murder
- Loss of
control
- Replaced
provocation
- s.54 CJA 2009
- Burden is on
the prosecution
to disprove
- Diminished
repsonsibility
- s.2 (1) HOMICIDE ACT 1957
- Amended by CJA 2009
- Burden is on D to
prove it on the
balance of
probabilities
- Suicide pact (not
relevant to AQA)
- Only apply to a
murder charge.
- Partial defences, if
successful, charged
with voluntary
manslaughter
- Loss of Control
- Must have lost
self-control and this
caused the killing
- The loss of self-control
had a qualifying trigger
- A person of D's sex and age with a
normal degree of tolerance and
self-restraint would have acted in
a similar way to D in the
circumstances
- D must have lost his self control
- There must be a loss
of self-control, not
just self-restraint:
COCKER
- The loss of control
does not have to
immediately follow
the qualifying trigger
- Defence is not
available where D
acted in a 'considered
desire for revenge':
s.54(4)
- Loss of self control
must have had a
qualifying trigger: s.55
- Fear of violence from V
against D or another
identified person:
WARD
- Things done and/or said
which were extremely grave
and caused D to have a
justifiable sense of being
seriously wronged: ZEBEDEE
- Certain triggers are
excluded by CJA 2009:
- Things done and/or said which
amount to sexual infidelity
cannot be a trigger on their
own: s.55 (6)
- Sexual infidelity can be
used to explain the context
of other potential
qualifying triggers:
CLINTON
- Situations where D has
encourage fear or violence or
the thing done or said in
order to have an excuse to
use violence: DAWES
- A person of D's sex and age,
with a normal degree of
tolerance and self-restraint in
the circumstances of D must
have reacted in the same or a
similar way to D
- Circumstances relating to D's
general capacity to exercise
tolerance and self-restraint are to
be disregarded: s.54 (3)
- Such as D being drunk:
ASMELASH, depressed,
epileptic or aggressive
by nature
- Unemployment, EFFECTS of
discovering sexual infidelity, history
of sexual abuse or a sever alcohol
or drugs problem for which D was
taunted can be taken into account
when deciding if a normal person
would have reacted in the same or
a similar way.
- Diminished
Responsibilty
- D must have suffered an
abnormality of mental
functioning which
- Arose from a
recognised medical
condition
- Substantially
impaired D's ability
to:
- Understand the
nature of his
conduct
- Form rational
judgement
- Exercise
self-control
- Provides an explanation
fro D's conduct in doing
or being a part to the
killing
- D must have suffered an
abnormality of mental
functioning: BYRNE
- D's abnormality of mental
functioning must have been
caused by a recognised
medical condition
- Severe depression
- Paranoia
- Delusions
- Battered
Woman's
Syndrome (BWS)
- Alcohol
Dependency
Syndrome (ADS)
- Depends on the
nature and extent
of ADS: STEWART
- Covers physical
condition which affects
mental functioning
- Epilepsy
- Sleep disorder
- Diabetes
- Must be medical
evidence given at the
trial to prove this
- Abnormality of mental
functioning must
impair D's ability
- The impairment need not
be total but must be more
than trivial: LLOYD
- Abnormality of mental
functioning must
provide an explanation
for the conduct in
killing or being a party
to the killing
- Since the CJA 2009 There
must be a causal
connecting between
abnormality of mental
functioning and the killing.
- Need not be the
only factor, but a
significant factor in
the conduct.
- Voluntary intoxication is
not capable of
establishing the defence
alone: DOWDS/
DIETSCHMANN