Diminished Responsibility - 1 Flashcards
Murder
What does diminished responsibility come under?
S.52 Coroners and Justices Act 2009
What are the 3 factors for DR?
1) Arose from a medical condition
2) Substantially impaired D’s ability to do one or more of :
- to understand the nature of his conduct
- to form a rational judgement
- to exercise self-control
3) Provides an explanation for D’s omissions and acts to the killing.
What is the definition of ‘abnormality of mental functioning’
State of mind being so different from that of a ordinary human being that the reasonable person would term it abnormal. It also covers the ability to exercise willpower.
R v Bryne 1960
D strangled and mutilated the body of a young girl and claimed that he had suffered with perverted sexual desires from childhood which he found impossible to resist. He could not make a rational judgement nor exercise his willpower.
R v Fairweather 2016
D committed 2 killings over a 3 month period. He claimed he was suffering from a psychotic episode at the time and heard voices telling him to kill. Evidence showed he had autism spectrum disorder which was a recognised abnormality however he was he was not in a psychotic episode at the time of the killing therefore court rejected the defence of DR.
Recognised Medical Condition - R v Martin
D had been a victim of burglaries in the past and police had been unsatisfactory. He owned a shotgun and his house was broken into by 3 men and shot one of them 3 times and he died. D was suffering with paranoid personality disorder and depression therefore his conviction was voluntary manslaughter on the basis of DR.
R v Brennan
If two doctors agree on the recognised medical condition then murder has to be withdrawn from the jury.
R v Brown
The abnormality had to be more than minimal or trivial contribution to the killing but does not have to be the sole cause.
Provides explanation for D’s acts and omissions - R v Osbourne
D appealed against murder, he had been smoking cannabis and was involved in a fight. He attempted appeal for DR on the basis of his ADHD saying it substantially impaired his behaviour. Appeal was rejected as his ADHD did not substantially impair his mental responsibilities at the time of the killing. His drug use explained his anger.
