LAW P1 CRIM CASES (diminshed responsibility)

Question 1

What is the case for the first DR requirement?

Answer 1

R v Byrne, an abnormality of mind is a state of mind so different from that of an ordinary person that a reasonable person would term it abnormal

Question 2

What is the case for the second DR requirement?

Answer 2

R v Woods, the defendant suffered from alcohol dependency syndrome

Question 3

What is the case for the third DR requirement?

Answer 3

R v Golds, the court should leave interpretation of the word ‘substantial’ to the jury

Question 4

What is the case for the fourth DR requirement?

Answer 4

R v Dietschman, the jury should consider whether the abnormality alone substantially impaired the defendant’s responsibility