voluntary manslaughter

Question 1

what are the 3 special defences to a murder charge

Answer 1

where D kills v due to malice aforethought but the killing occurs due to:

• loss of control
• diminished responsibility
• suicide pact

Question 2

why are the defences special

Answer 2

they only apply to a murder charge

Question 3

why are the defences partial

Answer 3

if successful the conviction is for voluntary manslaughter not murder- merely reduce liability

Question 4

what sentence does voluntary manslaughter carry

Answer 4

a discretionary life sentence

Question 5

what did loss of control replace

Answer 5

the previous defence of provocation

Question 6

where is the law set out for loss of control

Answer 6

s54 coroners and justice act 2009

Question 7

what 3 things are required for loss of control

Answer 7

• d must have lost self control and this must’ve caused the killing
• loss of self control had a qualifying trigger
• person of ds sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint and in circumstances of d might have reacted in a similar way

Question 8

who is the burden on when d raises the defence

Answer 8

prosecution to disprove beyond reasonable doubt

Question 9

what must there be? and not just

Answer 9

must be a loss of control, not just self restraint- cocker

Question 10

cocker

Answer 10

• CA upheld conviction for murder because partial defence of provocation failed
• hadn’t lost self control only self restraint

Question 11

when can the loss of self control occur

Answer 11

it doesn’t have to immediately follow the qualifying trigger- can be a delay between the qualifying trigger and the killing

Question 12

when is the defence not available

Answer 12

if d acted in a considered desire for revenge- s54

Question 13

which sections sets out that ds loss of control must have a qualifying trigger

Answer 13

55

Question 14

what can qualifying triggers be

Answer 14

• ds fear of seriously violence from d against v or another identified person
• things done and/or said which were extremely grave and caused d to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged

Question 15

ds fear of serious violence case

Answer 15

ward

Question 16

ward

Answer 16

d did not fear serious violence personally but this qualifying trigger nevertheless applied because he feared that v would use serious violence on his brother

Question 17

‘extremely grave’ case

Answer 17

zebedee

Question 18

zebedee

Answer 18

CA upheld murder conviction. although there were things done, they were not extremely grave nor did they give d a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged

Question 19

what are certain triggers excluded by

Answer 19

coroners and justice act

Question 20

what certain triggers are excluded

Answer 20

• things done or said which amount to sexual infidelity
• situations where d has encouraged either the dear of violence/ thing done or said, in order to have excuse to use violence

Question 21

when can sexual infidelity kind of be a qualifying trigger

Answer 21

can be used to explain the context of other potential qualifying triggers- clinton

Question 22

clinton

Answer 22

• convicted of murder, appealed on basis that defence of loss of control should have been left to jury
• CA agreed as sexual infidelity should have been used to explain context of other things done/said
• conviction quashed and a retrial ordered

Question 23

d encouraging violence or thing done or said case

Answer 23

dawes

Question 24

circumstances that may be taken into account in deciding whether a person of normal self restraint might have reacted in a similar way

Answer 24

• unemployment
• effects of sexual infidelity- Clinton
• history of being sexually abused
• severe problem with alcohol (D) and was mercifully taunted about condition

Question 25

which circumstances are to be disregarded when deciding whether a qualifying trigger is valid

Answer 25

circumstances which only relate to ds general capacity to exercise tolerance and self restraint- s54 things that made d lose control more easily are ignored- asmelash

Question 26

4 examples of circumstances that can be taken into account in deciding whether a person of normal self restraint might have reacted in a similar way

Answer 26

- unemployment - effects of sexual infidelity - history of being sexually abused - alcohol/drug problem and being teased about it

Question 27

what was diminished responsibility introduced by

Answer 27

the homicide act 1957

Question 28

in which section is the law on diminished responsibility set out in

Answer 28

s2(1)HOMICIDE ACT 1957

Question 29

under which act was the law on diminished responsibility amended

Answer 29

coroners and justice act 2009

Question 30

what kind of defence is diminished responsibility

Answer 30

special and partial

Question 31

who is the burden of proof on for dim res

Answer 31

d to prove on balance of probabilities

Question 32

what must d have suffered from for diminished responsibility

Answer 32

an abnormality of mental functioning- BYRNE

Question 33

what must ds abnormality of mental functioning by caused by dim res

Answer 33

a recognised medical condition

Question 34

BYRNE

Answer 34

court said abnormality of mind was a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal

Question 35

which conditions does 'recognised medical condition' for diminished responsibility cover

Answer 35

- psychological conditions | - physical conditions which affect mental functioning (eg epilepsy, diabetes)

Question 36

what must be given at trial to prove ds recognised medical condition for diminished responsibility

Answer 36

medical evidence

Question 37

what must ds abnormality of mental functioning have substantially impaired ds ability to do dim res

Answer 37

- understand nature of conduct or - form a rational judgement or - exercise self control

Question 38

LLOYD

Answer 38

impairment need not be total but must be more than trivial- dim res

Question 39

what must d finally prove for dim res

Answer 39

his abnormality of mental functioning provides an explanation for his conduct in doing or being a party to the killing

Question 40

what does in mean that there must be a causal connection between ds abnormality of mental functioning and the killing under CAJA for dim res

Answer 40

abnormality of mental functioning need not be the only factor which caused d to do/be involved in the killing- must be a significant factor

Question 41

which is not capable alone of establishing the defence of diminished responsibility

Answer 41

voluntary intoxication- DOWDS

Question 42

DOWDS

Answer 42

-CA upheld conviction for murder on basis that voluntary acute intoxication is not capable of establishing diminished responsibility

Question 43

DEITSCHMANN

Answer 43

- H/L quashed murder conviction and substituted conviction for voluntary manslaughter - abnormality didn't have to be only cause of killing but d had to show despite drink he had sufficient abnormality of mind to impair his respon. for killing