Voluntary Manslaughter

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

Próximo

Descrição

Resumo de Recurso

Semelhante

	Criado por Lucy Nove quase 8 anos atrás