Involuntary manslaughter
D satsses the actus reus o m murder but not the mens rea
Unlaw mul act manslaughter
gross negligence manslaughter
reckless manslaughter
Unlaw mul act manslaughter
D commits a criminal act in dangerous circumstances and this causes the death o m V.
Actus reus:
1. An unlaw mul act/criminal act
2. Which was dangerous
3. Which caused V’s death
Mens rea: Whatever the necessary mens rea is mor the unlaw mul act.
1)An unlawful act
An unlaw mul act= commission o m a criminal ofence
the ‘base ofence’
must be an ofence which has a subjectve mens rea (Andrews v DPP 1937)
must be commited by an act, not an omission (Lowe 1973- mailed in his duty to meed his child
so not guilty o m unlaw mul act manslaughter)
must sats my every element o m the ofence and have no de mence (lamb 1967- D and V were
playing with a loaded revolver and both knew it was loaded but neither mully understood
how a revolver worked. D pulled the trigger while aiming at V not realising that it would sre.
Not guilty mor unlaw mul act manslaughter as there was no mens rea mor the base ofence)
2)The unlawful act must be dangerous
Edmund Davies J in Church 1965) “the unlaw mul act must be such that all sober and
reasonable people would inevitably recognise that it must subject the other person to at
least the risk o m some harm resultng there mrom albeit not serious harm”.
The type o m moresight (Dawson 1985- cashier o m a petrol staton died o m a heart atack as a
result o m D’s atempted robbery. He was not elderly and was o m good health. Protected by
bullet proo m glass. Originally D was mound guilty as judge directed the jury to take into
account that V had a heart conditon however D would not have known this so this was a
wrong convicton which was later quashed when appealed.) (Watson 1989- harm need not
be aimed at the victm. urglar was guilty o m unlaw mul act manslaughter as an elderly man
died mrom a heart atack due to the shock o m being burgled) (JF and NE 2015)
The type o m harm (JM and SM 2012)
D satsses the actus reus o m murder but not the mens rea
Unlaw mul act manslaughter
gross negligence manslaughter
reckless manslaughter
Unlaw mul act manslaughter
D commits a criminal act in dangerous circumstances and this causes the death o m V.
Actus reus:
1. An unlaw mul act/criminal act
2. Which was dangerous
3. Which caused V’s death
Mens rea: Whatever the necessary mens rea is mor the unlaw mul act.
1)An unlawful act
An unlaw mul act= commission o m a criminal ofence
the ‘base ofence’
must be an ofence which has a subjectve mens rea (Andrews v DPP 1937)
must be commited by an act, not an omission (Lowe 1973- mailed in his duty to meed his child
so not guilty o m unlaw mul act manslaughter)
must sats my every element o m the ofence and have no de mence (lamb 1967- D and V were
playing with a loaded revolver and both knew it was loaded but neither mully understood
how a revolver worked. D pulled the trigger while aiming at V not realising that it would sre.
Not guilty mor unlaw mul act manslaughter as there was no mens rea mor the base ofence)
2)The unlawful act must be dangerous
Edmund Davies J in Church 1965) “the unlaw mul act must be such that all sober and
reasonable people would inevitably recognise that it must subject the other person to at
least the risk o m some harm resultng there mrom albeit not serious harm”.
The type o m moresight (Dawson 1985- cashier o m a petrol staton died o m a heart atack as a
result o m D’s atempted robbery. He was not elderly and was o m good health. Protected by
bullet proo m glass. Originally D was mound guilty as judge directed the jury to take into
account that V had a heart conditon however D would not have known this so this was a
wrong convicton which was later quashed when appealed.) (Watson 1989- harm need not
be aimed at the victm. urglar was guilty o m unlaw mul act manslaughter as an elderly man
died mrom a heart atack due to the shock o m being burgled) (JF and NE 2015)
The type o m harm (JM and SM 2012)
