The Law on Voluntary Manslaughter
Voluntary manslaughter, as established by the Homicide Act 1957, is
determined by three sections: diminished responsibility, provocation,
and suicide pact.
Diminished responsibility is established by Section 2 of the Homicide
Act. It may be used as a defence to murder if the defendant can prove
an abnormality of the mind (if, for example, the defendant is an
alcoholic, or has a mental condition as in R v Byrne, where the
defendant had uncontrollable sexual desires.) The defence is that the
defendant does not have the necessary control over their actions, when
compared to a reasonable person.
Diminished responsibility has been criticised for a number of reasons:
· The very term 'Diminished responsibility' has been criticised by
authorities such as the Butler Committee, who say that it is 'not a
medical fact relating to the accused'. It was suggested by them that '
a person should not be convicted of murder if there is medical or
other evidence that they were suffering from a form of mental
disorder'. The criminal law committee agreed with this, but were not
happy with the wording, suggesting that instead it should be:
· 'The mental disorder was such as to be a substantial enough reason
to reduce the offence to manslaughter.'
· There is a danger for the accused when using it, because the
prosecution sometimes responds by arguing that the defendant is
insane.
· This defence can also be used for political reasons, as in so-called
'mercy killings', where often the prosecution will accept diminished
responsibility as a defence, to avoid public outcry.
· This has also occurred the other way around, in the 'Yorkshire
Ripper' case, R v Sutcliffe, as the defendant was refused the defence
and convicted of murder due to public opinion.
Provocation, as defined in s3 of the Homicide Act 1957, allows the
defendant to be convicted of manslaughter instead of murder if they
can prove that they were provoked by something said or done by the
victim, and that a reasonable person would have reacted in the same
This is an annotated bibliography for research on assisted suicide and how it effects the patient and the family and friends involved. I am researching whether or not assisted suicide is inhumane or dignified upon request of the patient.
Actus Reus: It was never unclear if the accused was responsible for the act occurring. There were several eye witness testimonies placing her as the offender which was backed up by CCTV footage from a camera in the lane. Furthermore, at the beginning of the trial the offender pleaded not guilty of murder but guilty of constructive manslaughter and that it was caused by reckless driving on her behalf. By claiming manslaughter the offender immediately takes full responsibility for the act regardless of what charge they are handed.
... death (as in the case of Hillsborough).In addition to this, section 4 (2) of same act also state that the Senior Coroner is required as part of the investigation to hold an Inquest into the deaths of victims if the result of the death was unknown and unnatural.
"This is a very special day for me. It's the day of my release, the
In this essay I will be analysing the morality of voluntary active euthanasia (VAE). I will focus on the argument that if such an act is considered morally acceptable, it can only lead down a slippery slope in which society becomes grossly unrecognizable in terms of the value of life. This essay will examine the strengths and weaknesses of this argument and the moral principles which underpin it to determine whether or not it remains a convincing argument to VAE.
Euthanasia has been a long debated subject consisting of many opinions and believes. For this paper I will be providing my rationale on why I am for legalization of active voluntary euthanasia for terminally ill clients in Canada. Active voluntary euthanasia should be legalized because it respects the individual’s choice, it allows individuals to flourish in their passing, and reduces the individual from further suffering. These are all important components of bioethics, and are all good reasons why euthanasia is not a negative thing. Active voluntary euthanasia is “the active killing of a dying person” requested by the client themselves (Collier & Haliburton, 2011, p. 226). In the paper I will also be discussing about virtue ethics, the principle of autonomy, and care ethics.
These crimes (Aggravated assault, Non-Negligent/Negligent Homicide) are serious crimes in America and throughout other countries, but in America you would face time in prison for the crime you committed. You have aggravated assault which is crime that it an attempt to cause serious bodily injury to another or it is consider purposely knowingly or recklessly harm to the value of a human life. Then you have negligent homicide which is a crime that it much more less intent, but can be charge if the person causes death towards another through criminal negligence. Last of we Non-Negligent homicide which is way different from Negligent homicide, but it is a willful (non-negligent) killing of one human by another. Out of all these crimes each
Actus Reus of Murder When a man of sound memory over the age of discretion unlawfully kills
Death. It is the inevitable outcome of this journey we call life. It is human nature to embrace self-preservation and prolong life as long as possible. In the end, death comes for us all. It can come in the form of an unexpected and tragic accident. A person is taken from this world as quickly as they entered it, leaving their loved ones in shock and grieving the life that was ripped away so suddenly. But what of those who are faced with their impending death before it even happens; those who suffer from terminal illnesses or have sustained injuries that cannot be treated? In these cases, the question arises; should these individuals be allowed the option to end or receive assistance in ending their life on their own terms? Should someone suffering be given the choice to either hang on and let nature run its course or embrace death and face it without prolonging the pain. Many would argue the choice to end one’s own life would be immoral and defy the laws of God and that one who suggests taking their own life is in need of emotional or spiritual intervention. But one cannot fully grasp the emotions experienced when facing one’s own death, making the question of the morality of assisted suicide hard to weigh-. For me, humanity is what it all comes down to. When seeing a pet suffer from either illness or injury, the humane thing to do is to end their suffering. Why would this be any different for human beings? Every person should be given the freedom and the right to end their life by choice if it avoids prolonging pain and suffering.
Today's society is now introduced to one of the most controversial issues; assisted suicide. Just like in other controversial arguments, there are many people that feel that it is wrong for people to ask their healthcare provider to end one's life; while others feel that if the person is terminally ill and has given their will to die, that they can be assisted in suicide. Though both sides are reasonable many people believe that people should not take part in helping someone take their own life, assisted suicide should be legal because, it plays a factor of conquering one’s feelings, gives an option to those whom are terminally ill or in immense pain, and every human
The jury in trying to let the defendant go considered if there were any circumstances that would provide say as a self-defense claim to justify this horrific crime of murder of two people named Mr. Stephan Swan and Mr. Mathew Butler. Throughout the guilt/innocent phase, the jury believes not to have heard convincing evidence the victims were a threat to the defendant nor a sign the defendant was in fear for his life before he took the victims’ lives.
that act. If the threat of death stays in the hand of a would-be murder, and we
...e is not served. Also, the family of the victim must be taken into consideration. The family has suffered greatly and deserves to see justice served.
Attempted murder, involved the voluntary act of Jack pointing a gun and firing it (act) at Bert that resulted in (causation) death of Pratt (social harm), which proves the elements of actus reus. ...
A defence in criminal law arises when conditions exist to negate specific elements of the crime: the actus reus when actions are involuntary, the mens rea when the defendant is unaware of the significance of their conduct, or both. These defences will mitigate or eliminate liability from a criminal offence. Insanity, automatism and diminished responsibility are examples of said defences. They each share characteristics but can be distinguished in their scope and application.