Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Unit 3 Defences: Diminished Responsibilty (Abnormality of mental…
Unit 3 Defences: Diminished Responsibilty
Set out in
S.2(1)
of the
Homicide Act 1957
, amended by
S.52
of the
Coroners and Justice Act 2009
Definition of DR
Suffering from an abnormality of functioning which ..
Substainitally impaired D's ability to: Understand the nature of their conduct, from a rational judgement or excersise self-control
Provides an explanation for D's actions
Arose from a recognised medical condition
Abnormality of mental functioning
Covers both physical and psychological conditions
D's mental functioning was so different from that of an ordinary person. Must be from a recognised medical condition and have 2x Doctors medical opinion.
Byrne:
D was a sexual psychopath, who wanted to abuse women, doctors said his mental abnormality meant he was unable to control his sexual desires. sufficient for the defence
R v Reynolds
- Pms, Post natal depression,
R v Swan
- Depression
R v hobbson
- Battered wife syndrome
R v Simcox
- Paranoia
R v Moyle
- schizophrenia
R v Gomez
- Held that the abnormality does not have to be permanent or from birth
Substantially impairs's
R v Lloyd
- D strangled his wife but medical evidence showedreative current depression affected him at the tie but not permantly.
Held that it need not be total but more then minimal
Khan
- Impossible to provide a scientific measurement so must be left to the jury to decide
Understand the nature of his conduct
: involves situations such as automotive states or severe learning difficulties
Ability to form a rational judgment
: where d knows what he is doing is wrong but cannot form a rational judgement
Exercise self control
: Someone is unable to control an urge to do something
Provides and explanation for D's conduct
S.2(1)(B) Homicide Act 1957
states it causes or is a significant contributory factor in causing D to carry out the conduct
DR and Intoxication
Being drunk alone is insufficient for a Abnormality of the mind
De Duca
: The immediate effect of drink or drug is not an abnormality
Dowds
: D and Gf were drinking, D stabbed her 60 times. Held that in voluntary intoxication and intoxicated state never gets you the defence.
Intoxication + Abnormality
Jury has to take away the fact that D is drunk and then consider if the abnormality still allows them to get the defence
Dietschmann
: D and V were drinking together when V said some harsh words about D's aunt who had just died. At the time he was suffering with a adjustment disorder so got the defence
Alcohol dependecy
Wood:
Alcohol addiction is considered an abnormality as is sufficient if it supplies the reason for D's conduct