Voluntary Manslaughter 1B

Question 1

Loss of Control

Answer 1

A partial defence to murder

Question 2

Where can the definition of loss of control be found?

Answer 2

Under s54(1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009

Question 3

What is the first part of Loss of control?

Answer 3

s54(1)(a) - D’s acts and omissions resulted from D’s loss of self-control.

Question 4

Which case defines a loss of self control?

Answer 4

Jewell

Question 5

What does Jewell define loss of self control as?

Answer 5

losing the ability to act in accordance with considered judgement or a loss of normal powers of reasoning.

Question 6

Give some examples of emotions or behaviour which illustrate a loss of self control.

Answer 6

Raised voice, shaking or pacing, staring or zoned out, screaming or crying, aggression (hitting items or people).

Question 7

What section is used for sudden loss?

Answer 7

s54(2)

Question 8

What does s54(2) say?

Answer 8

D’s loss of self control does not need to be sudden.

Question 9

What is the exclusion to this defence?

Answer 9

s54(4) - D can not use this defence if he acted out of a considered desire for revenge.

Question 10

Give a case example for the exclusion.

Answer 10

Jewell

Question 11

What is the second part of Loss of control?

Answer 11

s54(1)(b) - D’s loss of self control must come from a ‘qualifying trigger’ .

Question 12

Where can you define the fear trigger in the C&J Act 2009? (+ define it)

Answer 12

s55(3) - D’s loss of self control must come from D’s fear of serious violence from V against D or another identified person.

Question 13

Where can you define the anger trigger in the C&J Act 2009? (+ define it)

Answer 13

s55(4) - D’s loss of self control must come from things said or done by V which must be of an extremely grave character that give D a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.

Question 14

Give a case example of an anger trigger being non valid.

Answer 14

Evans - Tea

Question 15

What is the 6c exclusion?

Answer 15

s55(6)(c) - The fact that the thing said or done constituted sexual infidelity must be disregarded.

Question 16

What case gives the exception to the 6c exclusion?

Answer 16

R v Clinton - Where there is something said or done other than the infidelity, but it would be impossible to understand why those things are so bad without knowing of the infidelity, then the infidelity can be considered as context for those other things.

Question 17

What is the incitement exclusion?

Answer 17

s55(6)(a) and (b) - D cannot use the defence if he incites the fear or anger trigger in order to provide himself with an excuse for violence.

Question 18

What is the 3rd part of loss of control?

Answer 18

S54(1)(c) requires that a person of D’s sex and age , with a normal degree of tolerance and self restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in a similar way.

Question 19

What section talks about D’s circumstances?

Answer 19

S54(3) says the circumstances of D are everything other than things that only affect D’s tolerance and restraint in general.

Question 20

What circumstances have to be ignored?

Answer 20

Those that ONLY affect D’s ability to exercise tolerance and self restraint.

Question 21

What are some conditions that affect tolerance and self restraint?

Answer 21

Short temper
Schizophrenia
Bipolar
Intoxication

Question 22

Give an example of the question you would ask.

Answer 22

Would a “40 year old man” who “is Muslim and comes home from the mosque to find his daughter with a boy” but who has normal levels of tolerance and self restraint do something similar to “stabbing V 19 times”?

Question 23

What does Asmelash say?

Answer 23

Those circumstances that are normally ignored can be considered when they are related to the things said or done by V.

Question 24

Diminished responsibility

Answer 24

A partial defence to murder.

Question 25

Where is DR defined?

Answer 25

S2 Homicide Act 1957 (as amended by the Coroner and Justice Act 2009)

Question 26

How does DR work?

Answer 26

For DR to work D has to be suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a registered medical condition which substantially impairs D's ability to do one of 3 things and provides an explanation for D's acts or omissions.

Question 27

What is the first part of DR?

Answer 27

Abnormality of mental functioning

Question 28

What case is used for AMF?

Answer 28

Byrne

Question 29

How does Byrne define AMF?

Answer 29

A state of mind so different from that of an ordinary human being that a reasonable man would term it abnormal.

Question 30

Give examples of AMF.

Answer 30

Paranoid, hearing voices, seeing things.

Question 31

What is the second part of DR?

Answer 31

Recognised Medical condition.

Question 32

How would you mention RMC in a scenario?

Answer 32

The AMF must come from a RMC and a medical professional must testify to support this.

Question 33

Give some case examples of RMCs.

Answer 33

Martin - Paranoid Personality disorder Hennessy - Diabetes Seers - Depression

Question 34

What are the three cases for intoxication as RMC?

Answer 34

Di Duca - intoxication by itself is not a RMC. Wood - Alcohol dependency syndrome is a RMC. Tandy - Brain damage from alcohol use/ substance use is a RMC.

Question 35

What is the third part of DR?

Answer 35

Substantially impairs D's ability to recognise 1 of 3 things.

Question 36

What are the three things?

Answer 36

Understand the nature of his conduct Form a rational judgement Exercise self control

Question 37

What case is used to define substantially?

Answer 37

R v Golds - it means less than total and more than minimal or trivial.

Question 38

What is the fourth part of DR?

Answer 38

Must provide an explanation for D's conduct.

Question 39

What section of what act do we use for explanation?

Answer 39

s2(1B) of Homicide Act 1957 - the AMF provides an explanation if it causes, or is a significant contributory factor.

Question 40

What case is used with intoxication and explanation?

Answer 40

Dietschmann - it does not matter is D is also drunk, if they have a AMF unrelated to intoxication that can still be a valid explanation.