• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Involuntary Manslaughter

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Involuntary Manslaughter Involuntary manslaughter is an unlawful killing where the defendant does not have the intention to kill or cause GBH. The lack of intention is what distinguishes involuntary manslaughter from murder. There are two ways of committing involuntary manslaughter. These are unlawful act manslaughter and Gross negligence manslaughter. The maximum sentence for involuntary manslaughter is life imprisonment, thus giving the judge discretion to impose any sentence, which is suitable for the particular circumstances of the offence. In some cases, the judge may even pass a non-custodial sentence. Unlawful act manslaughter Unlawful act manslaughter is also known as constructive manslaughter because the liability for the death is built up or constructed from the facts that the defendant has done a dangerous unlawful act, which caused the death. This makes the defendant liable, even though he did not realise that death or injury might occur. The actus reus of unlawful act manslaughter are: - The defendant must do an unlawful act - The act must be dangerous on an objective test - The act must cause death - The act was substantial cause of death The death must be caused by an unlawful act, which must be a criminal offence. ...read more.

Middle

An intervening act such as the victim self-injecting a drug breaks the chain of causation, DALBY (1982). However, where the defendant helps with the injection, the link is established, ROGERS (2003). It is vital to understand that the mens rea for involuntary manslaughter concerns the initial crime itself, and can be intention or recklessness. The defendant must have the mens rea for the unlawful act but it is not necessary for the defendant to realise that the act is unlawful or dangerous. Although most cases involve some form of assault that requires intention or subjective recklessness, in DPP v NEWBURY (1976), the initial offence (which was not identified in the case) was surely of criminal damage, for which Caldwell or objective recklessness was formerly required. However, following R v G (2003), this kind of recklessness is no longer applicable. Gross Negligence manslaughter Gross negligence manslaughter is another way of committing manslaughter. It is completely different from unlawful act manslaughter. It is committed where the defendant owes the victim a duty of care but breaches it in a very negligent way, causing the death of the victim. ...read more.

Conclusion

The fact that a defendant has been negligent is nit enough to convict him of gross negligence manslaughter. The negligence has to be 'gross'. In BATEMAN (1925) which involved negligent treatment of patient by a doctor, it was stated that the negligence is 'gross' when it goes 'beyond a matter of mere compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the State and conduct deserving of punishment'. In ADOMAKO (1994) the HoFL approved this test and stressed that it was matter for the jury. The jury had to decide whether, having regard to the risk of death involved, the conduct of the defendant was as bad in all the circumstances as to amount, in their judgment, to a criminal act or omission. It is also not clear, if the test is that there had to be a risk of death through the defendant's conduct or whether the risk need only be to 'health and welfare' of the victim, STONE AND DOBINSON (1977). Or 'disregard for the life and safety of others', BATEMAN (1925). The mens rea required is negligence, rather than recklessness as it used to be. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    Sims v Leigh Rugby Club [1969] 2 All ER 923. Here a rugby player 'must be deemed willingly to accept the risks of playing on such a ground as complies with the by - laws of the Rugby League'. This rugby player as with any other sports player on the

  2. Law- Negligence

    There could therefore be liability for negligent misstatement regardless of whether or not there was a contractual relationship between the parties, provided the victim could also show reliance on the advice. In 1995, the case of White v Jones showed a solicitor drawing up a new will, splitting the testator's estate between the two plaintiffs.

  1. Gross negligence and recklessness.

    In Caldwell (1981) the accused had done some work for the owner of as hotel but had then quarrelled with him. He got drunk and then had set fire to the hotel in revenge. He was charged with two offences - the first under s.1 (1)

  2. The terms Actus Reus and Mens Rea

    The company who failed to secure the tap properly is also liable as it is there actions which initiated the chain of causation which led to the offence. Causation can be said to have begun with R. v Thabo Meli and R.

  1. What is the meaning of intention in English criminal law? Is it always possible ...

    to steal, commit rape, inflict GBH or unlawfully damage the building.coda dar sedadaw orda dak inda foda da. According to Lord Bridge in Moloney [1985], "the general legal opinion is that 'intention' cannot be satisfactorily defined and does not need a definition, since everybody knows what it means"; the analysis ought to be intuitively apparent.

  2. Discuss the criminal liability for an offence against the person of Reena in respect ...

    direct air or purpose in this case was to apply unlawful force. The definition of direct intention is "the accused's aim or purpose" as defined by The Court of Appeal in Mohan (1976). However the facts tell us that she carried out her conduct as a 'practical joke' thus her

  1. Involuntary Manslaughter

    A drunken woman swayed and cut her throat. Manslaughter was upheld. The act also need not be aimed at the victim, as in Mitchell. The defendant was waiting impatiently in a post office queue. He punched a 71 year old man, falling into an 89 year old woman who fell and died.

  2. In this report, the differences between contractual liability and tortuous liability are explained. In ...

    A wiring fault in Bright Light causes a fire which escapes down to the ground floor causing damage to Chemi-Kaze. Some of the containers of chemicals outside the back door have become damaged in the fire causing rust to develop. Vandals rob some of the containers and unscrew the caps.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work