Law: unit 3-Learning aim A & B : Homicide
Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, Invountary
Manslaughter, Corporate Manslaughter
Voluntary Manslaughter:
Unlawful killing:
Unlawful killing is causing someone's death unless it was self-defense or involved killing an
enemy in a war. It is necessary to prove that D’s acts or omissions caused V’s death. Death
must occur meaning the heart is not beating anymore or the brain stopped working intending to
look at brain-stem death. A person kept in a vegetative state is considered still alive.
Apply to the scenario:
Human being: Rerum Natura
A person has to be born fully to be murdered. A case example is A-G Ref No.3 1994 (1997),
where D stabbed his pregnant girlfriend in the face, abdomen, and back. 17 days after the
incident the woman went into premature labor. The baby died 121 days later due to premature
birth. On the death of the baby, D was charged with murder and manslaughter. The trial judge
held that he could not be convicted of murder or manslaughter since the fetus was not a human
being.
Apply to the scenario:
Under’s Queen’s peace:
Killing someone at queen’s peace when there is no war. Killing enemy soldiers is not murder,
the murder of a prisoner of war is.
Apply to the scenario:
In any country of realm:
If the crime (murder or manslaughter) is committed aboard by a British citizen they will have
their trial in England.
Apply to the scenario:
, Factual causation:
Factual causation, satisfied by the but-for test, if it wasn’t what the defendant did the victim
would have survived. If the main causation was not the defendant it is not established.
White v R (1910) -The defendant put some poison in his mother's milk to kill her. Medical
reports revealed that she died from a heart attack and not the poison. The defendant was not
liable for her murder as his act of poisoning the milk was not the cause of death.
Apply to the scenario:
Legal causation:
Legal causation looks at facts and blames considering the D’s contribution. Known as ‘de
minimum principle’. The D’s action needs to be the cause of death but must be a cause.
Defendants must contribute to death.
Kimsey (1986) -Kimsey (K) and Osbourne (O) were driving at high speeds in an extremely
close convoy. Whilst doing so, there was an accident in which O's car clipped a verge and spun
out of control, collided with the side of K's car, and went into the path of oncoming traffic.
Apply to the scenario:
Voluntary manslaughter is unlawful homicides that are NOT murder. The difference of murder
and manslaughter is the men’s rea of the D. Voluntary manslaughter is when the men’s rea of
murder is present (he had a reason to kill or hurt with intent ).
Charged with murder ----> Pleads special defense ----> special defense is successful. D is
acquainted of murder but convicted of voluntary manslaughter…..
Diminished responsibility:
This defense was set out in s2 Homicide Act 1957 as amended by S52 The Corners and
Justice Act 2009.
Under S52 D can plead this defense if, at the time of the killing he was
S52(1) Suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning:
(a) Which arose from a recognized medical condition
(b) And substantially impaired D’s ability to do any of the following in (s1A):
● To understand the nature of his conduct
● To form a rational judgment
● To exercise self-control
(c) And explains D’s actions
The burden of proving the defense is on the defendant, but to the civil standard
- on the balance of probabilities.
2
Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, Invountary
Manslaughter, Corporate Manslaughter
Voluntary Manslaughter:
Unlawful killing:
Unlawful killing is causing someone's death unless it was self-defense or involved killing an
enemy in a war. It is necessary to prove that D’s acts or omissions caused V’s death. Death
must occur meaning the heart is not beating anymore or the brain stopped working intending to
look at brain-stem death. A person kept in a vegetative state is considered still alive.
Apply to the scenario:
Human being: Rerum Natura
A person has to be born fully to be murdered. A case example is A-G Ref No.3 1994 (1997),
where D stabbed his pregnant girlfriend in the face, abdomen, and back. 17 days after the
incident the woman went into premature labor. The baby died 121 days later due to premature
birth. On the death of the baby, D was charged with murder and manslaughter. The trial judge
held that he could not be convicted of murder or manslaughter since the fetus was not a human
being.
Apply to the scenario:
Under’s Queen’s peace:
Killing someone at queen’s peace when there is no war. Killing enemy soldiers is not murder,
the murder of a prisoner of war is.
Apply to the scenario:
In any country of realm:
If the crime (murder or manslaughter) is committed aboard by a British citizen they will have
their trial in England.
Apply to the scenario:
, Factual causation:
Factual causation, satisfied by the but-for test, if it wasn’t what the defendant did the victim
would have survived. If the main causation was not the defendant it is not established.
White v R (1910) -The defendant put some poison in his mother's milk to kill her. Medical
reports revealed that she died from a heart attack and not the poison. The defendant was not
liable for her murder as his act of poisoning the milk was not the cause of death.
Apply to the scenario:
Legal causation:
Legal causation looks at facts and blames considering the D’s contribution. Known as ‘de
minimum principle’. The D’s action needs to be the cause of death but must be a cause.
Defendants must contribute to death.
Kimsey (1986) -Kimsey (K) and Osbourne (O) were driving at high speeds in an extremely
close convoy. Whilst doing so, there was an accident in which O's car clipped a verge and spun
out of control, collided with the side of K's car, and went into the path of oncoming traffic.
Apply to the scenario:
Voluntary manslaughter is unlawful homicides that are NOT murder. The difference of murder
and manslaughter is the men’s rea of the D. Voluntary manslaughter is when the men’s rea of
murder is present (he had a reason to kill or hurt with intent ).
Charged with murder ----> Pleads special defense ----> special defense is successful. D is
acquainted of murder but convicted of voluntary manslaughter…..
Diminished responsibility:
This defense was set out in s2 Homicide Act 1957 as amended by S52 The Corners and
Justice Act 2009.
Under S52 D can plead this defense if, at the time of the killing he was
S52(1) Suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning:
(a) Which arose from a recognized medical condition
(b) And substantially impaired D’s ability to do any of the following in (s1A):
● To understand the nature of his conduct
● To form a rational judgment
● To exercise self-control
(c) And explains D’s actions
The burden of proving the defense is on the defendant, but to the civil standard
- on the balance of probabilities.
2
