Diminished Responsibility Year 13 Flashcards
(38 cards)
Where does it come from?
S.2 Homicide Act 1957 as amened by S.52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009
What is the first part of the definition?
A person will not be found guilty of murder if, at the time of the killing, the suffering from abnormally of mental functioning which arose from:
What are the 3 parts of the definition?
A recognised medical condition.
Which substantially impaired the D ability to form rational judgements, understand the nature of their conduct or exercise self control.
It provides an explanation for the D acts and omissions in doing or being party to the killing.
What is abnormality of mental functioning? Case.
The defendant must be suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning at the time of the killing. R v Bryne.
Depressive illness
R v Gittens
Irresistible impulses
R v Bryne
Battered Woman Syndrome
R v Ahluwalia
Alcoholism
R v Wood
Alchol Dependency Syndrome
R v Stewart
Paranoia
R v Simcox
Adjustment Disorder
R v Dietschmann
Epilepsy
R v Campbell
Pre-menstrual Tension
R v Smith
Post Natal Depression
R v Reynolds
Schizophrenia
R v Moyle
Paranoid Personality Disorder
R v Martin (Antony)
What is a recognised medical condition, how does it link? Is it only mental conditions?
The abnormality of functioning must be caused by a recognised medical condition. Medical not mental so can be physical or psycological conditions.
How will each case be decided for recognised medical conditions?
Will be decided on its own merits and medical evidence will be given at trial.
What does it mean by substantial impairment in relation of diminished responsibility? Case.
The D must suffer from a substantial impairment as a result of their medical condition.
R v Golds
How must a jury approach it and does the D have to be fully impaired?
The jury must not be directed to the meaning of substantial but the judge, it asked, can guide them on the point that the D must not be fully impaired.
What must the abnormality of mental function do in relation to substantial impairment?
Must substantially impair the D mental responsibility of his acts or omissions in doing or being party to the killing.
The D ability to do one of three things must be substantially impaired. What are they?
To understand the nature of their conduct.
To form rational judgement.
To exercise self-control.
Explain the ability to understand the nature of their conduct.
What does it cover? Give three examples.
Situations where the D is in an automatic state and is unaware of what they are doing.
Where the D firmly believes that they are suffering delusions and believe they are carrying out the act for a higher purpose (e.g. killing the devil but it’s actually Tom from down the road).
People who have learning difficulties and may not fully understand the nature of what they are doing.
Explain the ability to form rational judgements, with case law.
Even if D does know the nature of their conduct, they may not be able to form rational judgements.
Common in those that suffer from paranoia (R v Martin Antony) or schizophrenia (R v Moyles).
Also in Battered Women’s Syndrome.
R v Alhuwalia
