Holly Lawton Unit 4 A2 Law P2 M2
Unit 4 – P2, M2
Voluntary Manslaughter
There are three special defences to the charge of Murder, these are: Diminished
Responsibility, Loss of Control or Suicide Pact. Diminished Responsibility and
Suicide Pact are set out in the Homicide Act 1957. Loss of Control was later set
out in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. These defences are only partial
defences and reduce the offence from Murder to manslaughter if they are
accepted. This is important because it means that the judge then has discretion
in what sentence he imposes, therefore if the situation still demands a life
sentence he can give that, but if the situation demands a much lesser sentence
it can be given such as in Ahluwalia 1992.
Persons suffering from diminished responsibility.
(1)Where a person kills or is a party to the killing of another, he shall not be
convicted of murder if he was suffering from such abnormality of mind (whether
arising from a condition of arrested or retarded development of mind or any
inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impaired his
mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the
killing.
(2)On a charge of murder, it shall be for the defence to prove that the person
charged is by virtue of this section not liable to be convicted of murder.
(3)A person who but for this section would be liable, whether as principal or as
accessory, to be convicted of murder shall be liable instead to be convicted of
manslaughter.
(4)The fact that one party to a killing is by virtue of this section not liable to be
convicted of murder shall not affect the question whether the killing amounted to
murder in the case of any other party to it. -
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/5-6/11/section/2
Partial defence to murder: loss of control
54 Partial defence to murder: loss of control
(1)Where a person (“D”) kills or is a party to the killing of another (“V”), D is not
to be convicted of murder if—
(a)D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing resulted from D's
loss of self-control,
(b)the loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger, and
, Holly Lawton Unit 4 A2 Law P2 M2
(c)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 the same or in a
similar way to D.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), it does not matter whether or not the
loss of control was sudden.
(3)In subsection (1)(c) the reference to “the circumstances of D” is a reference to
all of D's circumstances other than those whose only relevance to D's conduct is
that they bear on D's general capacity for tolerance or self-restraint.
(4)Subsection (1) does not apply if, in doing or being a party to the killing, D
acted in a considered desire for revenge.
(5)On a charge of murder, if sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue with
respect to the defence under subsection (1), the jury must assume that the
defence is satisfied unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that
it is not.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5), sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an
issue with respect to the defence if evidence is adduced on which, in the opinion
of the trial judge, a jury, properly directed, could reasonably conclude that the
defence might apply.
(7)A person who, but for this section, would be liable to be convicted of murder is
liable instead to be convicted of manslaughter.
(8)The fact that one party to a killing is by virtue of this section not liable to be
convicted of murder does not affect the question whether the killing amounted to
murder in the case of any other party to it.
55Meaning of “qualifying trigger”
(1)This section applies for the purposes of section 54.
(2)A loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger if subsection (3), (4) or (5)
applies.
(3)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to D's fear of
serious violence from V against D or another identified person.
(4)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to a thing or
things done or said (or both) which—
(a)constituted circumstances of an extremely grave character, and
(b)caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
(5)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to a
combination of the matters mentioned in subsections (3) and (4).
(6)In determining whether a loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger—
Unit 4 – P2, M2
Voluntary Manslaughter
There are three special defences to the charge of Murder, these are: Diminished
Responsibility, Loss of Control or Suicide Pact. Diminished Responsibility and
Suicide Pact are set out in the Homicide Act 1957. Loss of Control was later set
out in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. These defences are only partial
defences and reduce the offence from Murder to manslaughter if they are
accepted. This is important because it means that the judge then has discretion
in what sentence he imposes, therefore if the situation still demands a life
sentence he can give that, but if the situation demands a much lesser sentence
it can be given such as in Ahluwalia 1992.
Persons suffering from diminished responsibility.
(1)Where a person kills or is a party to the killing of another, he shall not be
convicted of murder if he was suffering from such abnormality of mind (whether
arising from a condition of arrested or retarded development of mind or any
inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impaired his
mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the
killing.
(2)On a charge of murder, it shall be for the defence to prove that the person
charged is by virtue of this section not liable to be convicted of murder.
(3)A person who but for this section would be liable, whether as principal or as
accessory, to be convicted of murder shall be liable instead to be convicted of
manslaughter.
(4)The fact that one party to a killing is by virtue of this section not liable to be
convicted of murder shall not affect the question whether the killing amounted to
murder in the case of any other party to it. -
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/5-6/11/section/2
Partial defence to murder: loss of control
54 Partial defence to murder: loss of control
(1)Where a person (“D”) kills or is a party to the killing of another (“V”), D is not
to be convicted of murder if—
(a)D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing resulted from D's
loss of self-control,
(b)the loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger, and
, Holly Lawton Unit 4 A2 Law P2 M2
(c)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 the same or in a
similar way to D.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), it does not matter whether or not the
loss of control was sudden.
(3)In subsection (1)(c) the reference to “the circumstances of D” is a reference to
all of D's circumstances other than those whose only relevance to D's conduct is
that they bear on D's general capacity for tolerance or self-restraint.
(4)Subsection (1) does not apply if, in doing or being a party to the killing, D
acted in a considered desire for revenge.
(5)On a charge of murder, if sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue with
respect to the defence under subsection (1), the jury must assume that the
defence is satisfied unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that
it is not.
(6)For the purposes of subsection (5), sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an
issue with respect to the defence if evidence is adduced on which, in the opinion
of the trial judge, a jury, properly directed, could reasonably conclude that the
defence might apply.
(7)A person who, but for this section, would be liable to be convicted of murder is
liable instead to be convicted of manslaughter.
(8)The fact that one party to a killing is by virtue of this section not liable to be
convicted of murder does not affect the question whether the killing amounted to
murder in the case of any other party to it.
55Meaning of “qualifying trigger”
(1)This section applies for the purposes of section 54.
(2)A loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger if subsection (3), (4) or (5)
applies.
(3)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to D's fear of
serious violence from V against D or another identified person.
(4)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to a thing or
things done or said (or both) which—
(a)constituted circumstances of an extremely grave character, and
(b)caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.
(5)This subsection applies if D's loss of self-control was attributable to a
combination of the matters mentioned in subsections (3) and (4).
(6)In determining whether a loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger—
