VM: Diminished Responsibility Flashcards
(11 cards)
What is diminished responsibility?
As of s.2 Homicide Act 1957, and amended by s.52 Coroners and Justice Act 2009:
Where person convicted of manslaughter rather than murder as they were suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which
(a) arose from a recognised medical function,
(b) substantially impaired D’s ability to:
(i) understand the nature of his conduct; or
(ii) form a rational judgement; or
(iii) exercise self control, and
(c) provides an explanation for D’s act or omission in killing
What is an abnormality of mental functioning?
As of Byrne (1960) it is “a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal.”
In that case, D was a sexual psychopath who strangled and mutilated a women, medical records showed his abnormality of mind meant he was unable to control his desires.
What is a recognised medial condition?
Psychological and physical conditions according to established medial classifications and agreed by 2 doctors.
What are established medical classifications?
Psychotic condition (Golds 2016)
Post-natal depression (Boots 2012)
Mental disorder (Brennan 2014)
Alcohol dependency syndrome (Wood 2008)
Depressive illness (Dietschmann 2003)
Asperger’s syndrome (Jama 2004)
Battered Spouse’s Syndrome (Hobson 1997)
Severe learning difficulties may be used, but “natural immaturity” of child not defence
What is substantial impairment?
AMF substantially impairs D’s ability to
1. Understand nature of conduct
E.g. D suffers delusions and kills person thinking they are an alien
2. to form a rational judgement
E.g. D suffers from schizophrenia
3. To exercise self control
E.g. D knows they are strangling D but has uncontrollable urge to (Byrne)
How serious is “substantial”
Must be beyond merely trivial but D’s mental function need not be totally impaired (Golds (2016))
How does it need to provide an explanation for D’s conduct?
If AMF causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing D to carry out the conduct (s.52(1B))
Who is burden of proof on?
On defence, but only on the balance of probabilities
What if D was drunk at time of killing and claims DR?
Intoxication alone does not support as temporary effect is not a RMC
E.g. Dowds (2012) D killed partner whilst heavily drunk, no claim of dependency, could control when he drank
What if D was intoxicated due to an addiction or dependency?
ADS is a RMC where person cannot control drinking. Does not automatically mean D can rely on DR, but may be cause of an AMF
e.g. Wood (2008) medical experts agreed D had ADS but disagreed on how it damaged his brain.
If alcohol caused damage to brain it may be relevant
What if D was intoxicated but had a pre existing AMF?
Defence available if D can prove despite the drink his AMF was a substantial impairment explaining the killing.
E.g. Dietschmann (2003) D voluntarily consumed alcohol but had a depressed grief reaction to death of aunt, could use DR
