Diminished Responsibility Flashcards
What is Diminished Responsibility?
Diminished Responsibility is a legal defence that may be argued by a defendant (D) under S.52 the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
What is the three-stage test for Diminished Responsibility?
The three-stage test includes: 1) Abnormality of mental functioning from a recognised medical condition, 2) Substantial impairment of ability to understand conduct, form rational judgments, or exercise self-control, 3) The abnormality must be the reason for the killing.
What is Stage 1 of the Diminished Responsibility test?
Stage 1 requires that the defendant must be suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognised medical condition.
How is ‘abnormality of mental functioning’ defined?
‘Abnormality of mental functioning’ is defined as a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that a reasonable person would term it abnormal.
This definition is based on the case of Byrne.
What are some recognised medical conditions for Diminished Responsibility?
Recognised medical conditions include:
Severe depression (Seers)
Pre-menstrual tension (Smith)
Battered Wives Syndrome (Hobson)
Epilepsy (Campbell)
Paranoia/personality disorder (Martin)
Irresistible impulses (Byrne)
Alcohol Dependency Syndrome (Stewart)
What is Stage 2 of the Diminished Responsibility test?
Stage 2 states that the abnormality of mental functioning must have substantially impaired the defendant’s ability to understand their conduct, form rational judgments, or exercise self-control.
What does ‘substantial impairment’ mean?
‘Substantial impairment’ must be weighty, not trivial.
This principle is established in the case of Golds.
What is Stage 3 of the Diminished Responsibility test?
Stage 3 requires that the abnormality must be the reason for the killing.
What does Section 2(1)(b) of the amended Homicide Act 1957 state?
It states that the defendant’s abnormality of mental functioning must be a causal connection to the killing.
What is the side rule regarding intoxication?
If the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the killing, ignore the intoxication and consider whether the defendant would have still killed if they were not intoxicated.
This principle is based on the case of Dietschmann. If used, talk about the defense intoxication
What is the conclusion regarding D’s ability to argue Diminished Responsibility?
In conclusion, D will be successful in arguing the defence of diminished responsibility, leading to a reduction of the murder conviction to voluntary manslaughter.
