Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
External elements ATG no 3 1994 |
Death - Airendale( PVS Alive) of a human being (attg 3 1994, senior) by d's acts or omission (evans, gibbins and proctor, stone and dobinson) accelerating and inevitable death still a cause- dyson when doctors give pain medicine , defense, treated as incidental- Adams. |
|
|
MURDER mr Cunningham |
intention (Maloney, leave undefined, good sense)(woollin) To kill (need knowledge it is a person) Or cause gbh (Bollom), jury evaluates whether the harm is serious and has regard to the age and vulnerabilities of the victim- D doesn't decide what is grievous. |
|
|
Loss of control (old law) |
'anything said or done' DOUGHTY BABY 'Sudden' DUFFY, ALHUWALIA (passage of time is insistent with LOC) 'objective test'- Morhall (sting only)---Smith (depression, self control)----Holley (characteristics age sex) |
|
|
new law loss of control, found in... |
coroners and justice act 2009 s54(6) judge gatekeeper , decides s54(5) prosecution disprove BRD S54 a) loss of control (b) qualifying trigger (c) age sex normal degree of tolerance, circumstances. |
|
|
(1) lost control |
no longer sudden - protects women (alhuwalia?) Unlikely to have much effect - Jewell- dream like not consistent with loss of control. No getting around LOC denotes surging of emotion, rush of blood. s.edwards- tries to stop gender imbalance, doesn't really do anything- LOss of control is the problem- greater deliberation less likely to loose control. b.mitchell- difficult to have woman as loosing control when exercises plan to kill husband in sleep- ought to have mental or emotional disturbance at the heart not a loss of control. A.Norrie- conceptually incoherent. HOw can you show a legitimate sense of being wronged and a justifiable reaction if have to loose self control in the process. s54(4) cannot be out of revenge IBHRAMS but for BWS- more longer the delay- more likely not loss of control- more likely to be revenge |
|
|
(2) qualifying trigger |
s55(3) fear of serious violence- subjective genuine fear doesn't matter if not a real threat. relationship with SD? Incited Violence- ss55(6)a, must be intentional not foreseeable, manipulation of situation to have an excuse (narrow) DAWES Extremely provocative act s55(4)....doesn't need to be V who says the things DAVIES Personally feel wronged, but objective if justifiable (Mohammad, Hatter) |
|
|
excludes sexual infidelity as a sole trigger... but used in context CLINTON 55(6)c |
stark , norrie, clinton reduces scope dramatically, highly unlikely that with modern relationships it will ever be sexual infidelity on its own. can be used in fixing tariff AG23 2011 controversial- misses mischief- goes for sexual infidelity not jealously- stalker ex boyf. Who do i owe fidelity - Lord Judge denotes a continuing relationship. what is sexual infidelity- saying i love you , or telling him you cheated. |
|
|
objective test |
age sex, camplin, ali , raven circumstances- weight , sting of provocation- not exercising self control (54(3)). (eg depression short temper v learning difficulty) Morhall- glue sniffing not taken into accoutn for self control....but for the gravity so.....a reasonable man with normal self restraint, experiencing the gravity of someone being provoked who was a glue sniffer all their life. Asmelash- Same of alcoholic, alcoholism taken for sting and taunts, not self control. So an ordinary sober person experiencing the same gravity - stark air of artificiality. MIGHT- Von DOngen. |
|
|
DR |
abnormailty of mental functioning by recognized condition. (DOWDS- q of law, acute intoxicaiotn) substantially impaired... Brennan, not depart from contradicted evidence. Golds- needs to show it made a difference- more than trivial. provide an explanation... 2(1)c but also 2(1)b ----cause- causal link- cannot be a random coincidence mentally ill and killed. |
|
|
DR intoxication |
Voluntary not taken into account for substantial impairment only involuntary. Dowds- acute Tany- first drink voluntary Dietchsman -doesn't exclude defense if irrespective of alcohol there is a substantial impairment. wood- intoxication approach too simplistic- under baneful influence of sydrome where recognized condition is one of alcohol dependence take into account when considering substantial impairment. |
