Dimished Resposibility

Question 1

What did Sutcliffe teach us?

Answer 1

Sutcliffe taught us that DR is a jury decision, meaning there may be sufficient medical evidence of a recognised condition but juries do not have to accept this.

Question 2

Who is the burden of proof on in diminished responsibility?

Answer 2

It is on the defence, which must prove DR on the balance of probabilities.

Question 3

Name some recognised medical conditions and where we find out this must be proved to establish DR…

Answer 3

Depression (seers) 
PMS (English) 
Alcoholism (Tandy) 
Learning disabilities (Speak) 
Paranoid Schizophrenia (Sutcliffe)
Othello jealousy (Vinagre)
Sexual psychopath (Byrne)

We find this under section 52 1a

Question 4

What did R v Lloyd tell us about substantial impairment?

Answer 4

Sustaintal means more than trivial but not necessarily total impairment of Ds responsibilities (Homicide Act)

Question 5

What are the three things listed in s.52 (1)(A) as substantial impairment on Ds abilities?

Answer 5

Section 52 (1)(A) listed these as

a) nature of Ds conduct
b) form a rational judgment
c) excessive self control

Question 6

What 5 things will NOT be accepted as DR?

Answer 6

Hatred
Jealously 
Intoxicated 
Revenge 
Anger

Question 7

If DR is accepted what happens?

Answer 7

D’s conviction will be reduced to manslaughter from murder.

Question 8

What did Byrne teach us about abnormality?

Answer 8

That D’s abnormality must be a state of mind so different from the normal that the ordinary person would term it abnormal (Section 52 1).