unlawful act manslaughter

Question 1

Involuntary manslaughter definition

Answer 1

Unlawfully killing where D doesn’t intend to kill or cause GBH

Question 2

Unlawful act manslaughter definition

Answer 2

D has done a dangerous unlawful act that caused the death
makes D liable even if they didn’t realize death/injury may occur

Question 3

Elements of UAM

Answer 3

1. unlawful act
2. dangerous
3. causation
4. MR

Question 4

1. Unlawful act

Answer 4

must be a criminal offence, not a civil wrong - R V Franklin
- arson (R V waton)
- burglary (R V Goodfellow)
- criminal damage (DPP V Newbury and Jones)

must be an act, not an omission - R V Lowe (neglect of son, conviction quashed for UAM)

unlawful act must have caused the death - R V Lamb (didn’t realize barrel had turned, V didn’t apprehend violence so no UAM)

Question 5

must be a criminal offence, not a civil wrong

Answer 5

R V Franklin

Question 6

arson

Answer 6

R V waton

Question 7

burglary

Answer 7

R V Goodfellow

Question 8

criminal damage

Answer 8

R v Newbury and Jones

Question 9

2. Dangerous

Answer 9

objective test set out in Church 1966:

“sober and reasonable person to recognize at least the risk of some harm, not serious harm”

risk only needs to be some harm - Larkin (woman falls on open blade)
- R V JM and SM (brothers fighting bouncer)

dangerous act doesnt have to be aimed at V - R V mitchell

dangerous act can be aimed at property - R V Goodfellow

Dnagerous act must be physical har, not enoigh to frighten someone - R v Dawson
VS
Watson - where reasonable person would be aware of V’s fraility, they will be liable

Question 10

Church 1966

Answer 10

set out objective test for dangerous:

sober and reasonable person would recognize at least the risk of some harm, not serious harm”

Question 11

R v Larkin

Answer 11

Only needs to be the risk of some harm

D threatened man with open cut razor, woman tried to intervene but fell on blade
dangerous act was likely to injure someone

Question 12

R V Mitchell

Answer 12

Dangerous act doesnt have to be aimed at V
fight broke out in post office, knocked over old lady, died from injuries

Question 13

R V Goodfellow

Answer 13

dangerous act can be aimed a property
set fire to council flat so wouldn’t get rehoused, killed wife and woman

Question 14

R V Dawson

Answer 14

Dangerous act must be physical harm, not enough to frighten someone
conviction quashed even though petrol station attendant died from heart attack during attempted robbery

Question 15

Watson (in contrast to Dawson)

Answer 15

Elderly man died from HA 90 mins after being physically abused in an attempted burglary ( D would foresee the risk of harm as aware of frailty so liable)

Question 16

3. Causation - Substantial cause of death

Answer 16

normal rules apply
- factual
-legal
-novus actus intervenus

Coricon-Auguiste
Sohid
AG’s ref 4
R V kennedy
Cato

Question 17

Coricon-Auguiste

Answer 17

threw air bomb firework into crowed busstation, elderly woman knocked over in the rush, later died from head injuries

Question 18

Sohid

Answer 18

D part of group who attacked V at trainstaion, ended up on track with V, other members of the group prevented V from getting back up on platform, killed by train

Question 19

AG’s Ref 4

Answer 19

in fight, gf pushed over railing - D thoight she was dead, pulled her body by a rope and cut her up to dispose her - onlt convicted of manslaughter as couldnt e proven that the fall actually caused the death

Question 20

R V Kennedy

Answer 20

self administering drug = no causation, intervening act

D filled syringe with heroin at V’s request, V injected themselves, later died
conviction quashed as V’s own voluntary act broke the chain of causation

Question 21

Cato (in contrast with R V Kennedy)

Answer 21

D administered drugs to V = no break in causation, so UAM still present

Question 22

Mens Rea of UAM

Answer 22

MR for the unlawful act, not necessary for D to realize the risk of injury or death

e.g. if battery is the unlawful act = MR is intention/recklessness as to application of force

R V Newbury and Jones

Question 23

R V Newbury and Jones (MR)

Answer 23

2 15yr old boys threw paving slab off brine as train approach, killed the train guard
conviction upheld as didn’t need to foresee risk of death