Voluntary Manslaughter: key cases
(Diminished responsibility)
Name Decided Which element Brief facts Legal rule or principle
+ Year under or requirement Created
old/new does the case
law? relate
to?
Old law Element 1 & 3 D strangled girl & chopped up Abnormality of the mind is when a
Byrne 1960 But likely still to Explained abnormality… body person’s conduct is out of line with
apply in new law Confirmed that what the reasonable man would
psychopathy was do…
included (unable to
control urges)
Old law Element 2 Depression, Asperger’s These conditions were accepted
Seers, Jama, Syndrome, PMT & post natal as inherent causes/illnesses
Reynolds, Martin Which depression, Paranoia, under the old law.
& Simcox conditions/illnesses schizophrenia Will still apply under new law
were included which accepts any recognised
medical conditions on the WHO
lists (physical, psychological or
psychiatric)
Aluwahlia Old law Element 2 D suffered long term abuse from CA recognised battered woman’s
Inherent her husband. She waited for him syndrome as a condition for DR
causes/illnesses to go to sleep, poured petrol on
him, set him alight & he died.
Could not get provocation as there
was a delay/cooling off period.
Convicted of murder and
eventually appealed on DR and
the CA recognised battered
woman’s syndrome as a condition
for DR
New Law Element 4 D smoked cannabis and had CA upheld jury’s conviction
Osborne 2010 Causal connection ADHD, was angry and argued with saying that it is for the jury to
between abnormality & man in street. Hit him with plank of decide the causal connection and
killing wood killing him. here the killing was due to anger
& drugs and not the ADHD
(medical condition)
New Law Element 2 D was habitual binge drinker. CA confirmed that although acute
DR & Intox Drank large amount of vodka with voluntary intoxication appears on
Dowds 2012 g- friend before stabbing her 60 x the WHO list, English courts will
& killing her not accept it for DR (binge
drinking)
Old Law Element 2 D in relationship with auntie who CA said jury should ignore vol
Dietschmann DR & Intox died. He was suffering with grief, intox and decide if the medical
2003 an adjustment disorder. He got condition was sufficient
drunk & killed a man who insulted explanation for the killing.
her memory. (same approach will be applied
under new law)
Lloyd 1967 Old Law Element 3 FACTS N.A CA explained that the question of
Abnormality must have whether mental responsibility was
substantially impaired substantially impaired is a matter
D’s mental responsibility for the jury. Substantially means
for killing somewhere between trivial and
total impairment. (Khan 2009 later
confirmed it’s a matter for the jury)
Old Law Element 2 (inherent D was homeless alcoholic, lost Someone suffering with ADS no
Wood 2008 causes/illnesses) everything. A night of heavy longer has to prove that they have
DR & intox drinking awoke to find a man brain damage caused by
trying to perform a sex act on him alcoholism- not that all their
so killed him with a meat cleaver. drinking was completely
involuntary. ADS is sufficient for
DR (new law – ADS is on WHO
list)
Old Law Element 2 D was an alcoholic who killed her Even choosing to drink a different
Tandy DR & Intox daughter when she told her that type of drink is voluntary and DR
the step father was abusing her. was not available.
On that day she chose to drink a Wood changed this rule.
different alcohol to the one she
habitually drank.
(Diminished responsibility)
Name Decided Which element Brief facts Legal rule or principle
+ Year under or requirement Created
old/new does the case
law? relate
to?
Old law Element 1 & 3 D strangled girl & chopped up Abnormality of the mind is when a
Byrne 1960 But likely still to Explained abnormality… body person’s conduct is out of line with
apply in new law Confirmed that what the reasonable man would
psychopathy was do…
included (unable to
control urges)
Old law Element 2 Depression, Asperger’s These conditions were accepted
Seers, Jama, Syndrome, PMT & post natal as inherent causes/illnesses
Reynolds, Martin Which depression, Paranoia, under the old law.
& Simcox conditions/illnesses schizophrenia Will still apply under new law
were included which accepts any recognised
medical conditions on the WHO
lists (physical, psychological or
psychiatric)
Aluwahlia Old law Element 2 D suffered long term abuse from CA recognised battered woman’s
Inherent her husband. She waited for him syndrome as a condition for DR
causes/illnesses to go to sleep, poured petrol on
him, set him alight & he died.
Could not get provocation as there
was a delay/cooling off period.
Convicted of murder and
eventually appealed on DR and
the CA recognised battered
woman’s syndrome as a condition
for DR
New Law Element 4 D smoked cannabis and had CA upheld jury’s conviction
Osborne 2010 Causal connection ADHD, was angry and argued with saying that it is for the jury to
between abnormality & man in street. Hit him with plank of decide the causal connection and
killing wood killing him. here the killing was due to anger
& drugs and not the ADHD
(medical condition)
New Law Element 2 D was habitual binge drinker. CA confirmed that although acute
DR & Intox Drank large amount of vodka with voluntary intoxication appears on
Dowds 2012 g- friend before stabbing her 60 x the WHO list, English courts will
& killing her not accept it for DR (binge
drinking)
Old Law Element 2 D in relationship with auntie who CA said jury should ignore vol
Dietschmann DR & Intox died. He was suffering with grief, intox and decide if the medical
2003 an adjustment disorder. He got condition was sufficient
drunk & killed a man who insulted explanation for the killing.
her memory. (same approach will be applied
under new law)
Lloyd 1967 Old Law Element 3 FACTS N.A CA explained that the question of
Abnormality must have whether mental responsibility was
substantially impaired substantially impaired is a matter
D’s mental responsibility for the jury. Substantially means
for killing somewhere between trivial and
total impairment. (Khan 2009 later
confirmed it’s a matter for the jury)
Old Law Element 2 (inherent D was homeless alcoholic, lost Someone suffering with ADS no
Wood 2008 causes/illnesses) everything. A night of heavy longer has to prove that they have
DR & intox drinking awoke to find a man brain damage caused by
trying to perform a sex act on him alcoholism- not that all their
so killed him with a meat cleaver. drinking was completely
involuntary. ADS is sufficient for
DR (new law – ADS is on WHO
list)
Old Law Element 2 D was an alcoholic who killed her Even choosing to drink a different
Tandy DR & Intox daughter when she told her that type of drink is voluntary and DR
the step father was abusing her. was not available.
On that day she chose to drink a Wood changed this rule.
different alcohol to the one she
habitually drank.
