What is voluntary manslaughter?
Definition of murder appears to have been satisfied but one of two defences can be successfully pleaded. So, it has a specific partial defence. You can not be charged of voluntary manslaughter, charged of murder and if a defence is satisfied then the charge can be brought down to voluntary manslaughter.
What is diminished responsibility?
Originally defined in s2 of Homicide Act 1957 and then is now defined in s52 of Coroners and Justice Act 2009. It is the idea that you can have your conviction downgraded if the defendant can prove (burden of proof) on a balance of probabilities. (R v Wilcocks (2016))
How do we satisfy diminished responsibility? s.2(1)
- D was suffering from abnormality of mental functioning.
- Which is due to a recognised medical condition.
- Which substantially impairs the D,s ability to: understand nature of conduct OR form rational judgement OR exercise self control.
- The abnormality must provide explanation for D causing V’s death i.e there is a casual link between medical condition and the killing.
- Intoxication may also be a factor
- When there is unchallenged medical evidence, the judge should withdraw the charge of murder from the jury. (R v Brennan 2014)
Abnormality of mental functioning
- Doesn’t have to be a permanent abnormal functioning - just at the time of the murder.
- Previously called abnormality of mind.
- Courts still use the same standard of abnormality as in Byrne (1960) such as how some medical conditions will still be regarded as RMC’s under 2009 act such as: R v Gittens (depression) and R v Campbell (epilepsy)
Byrne (1960)
- Sexual psychopath was unable to control his perverted desires could plead diminished responsibility. (strangled a young woman and then mutilated her body)
- Abnormality of mind means: ‘a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would term it abnormal’
- Though D’s conviction was manslaughter, the court didn’t alter his sentence of life imprisonment.
AMF is due to medical conditions
- R v Conroy - four psychiatrists and COA agreed that ASD is a recognised medical disorder.
- R v Squelch - three psychiatrists and COA agreed that paranoid personality disorder is a RMC.
- Case law suggests that this includes physical, psychiatric and psychological disorders.
- Can be found in World Health Organisations International classification of diseases.
- For example, Aspergers syndrome (Jama) and Depression (seers) aswell as psychopathy (Byrne)
- Pre menstrual tension and post natal depression (R v Reynolds and R v English)
R v Dowds
- Just because a RMC appears in the list, it does not necessarily mean that they are capable of being relied upon to show an abnormality of mental health functioning.
Must substantially impair D’s ability to…
- understand the nature of his conduct
- to form a rational judgement
- to exercise self control
s52(1)b)
the abnormality of mental functioning must have substantially impaired D’s ability to do one or more of the three things listed.
R v Golds
- D killed partner and admitted to it.
- Had a mental condition.
- Psychotic state at the time of killing.
- Decided that the judge must direct that, while an impairment must be more than ‘merely trivial to be substantial’
What was held in R v Golds?
Ratio decidendi says that court should leave interpretation of the word ‘substantial’ to the jury, but can advise that substantial means ‘big or large’.
Ability to understand the nature of conduct
Covers situations such as where the defendant is in an automatic state, does not know what he or she is doing or suffers from delusions. It also covers people with severe learning difficulties.
Ability to form a rational judgement
The concept of rational judgement was introduced in the 2009 act but it is not defined there. Those suffering from paranoia, schizophrenia or battered spouse syndrome may not be able to form a rational judgement.
Ability to exercise self control
Seen in R v Byrne - inability to control his perverted desires.
The abnormality must provide an explanation for D causing V’s death
Section 2(1)b): ‘an abnormality of mental functioning provides an explanation for D’s conduct if it causes, or is a significant factor in causing, D to carry out that conduct.
Intoxication
Can support a defence of diminished responsibility.
- R v Dowds
- R v Deitschman
- R v Kay
- R v Tandy
- R v Wood
- R v Stewart
R v Dowds
D and his Gf were heavy binge drinkers. Whilst drunk, he stabbed her 60 times. He was convicted of murder and appealed on the grounds of ‘acute intoxication’. Appeal was rejected and conviction for murder upheld.
R v Deitschman
D felt that V was disrespecting D’s late aunt. He killed V by repeatedly stamping on him and kicking him. D had drank some whiskey and two pints of cider before. D was suffering from an adjustment disorder from the grief. Decided that D had satisfied the jury that his AMF had substantially impaired his mental responsibility.
