[Triplet1]

I'm studying A2 OCR criminal law and i'm struggling a bit with reckless manslaughter and cant find very much on it.
Can anyone help me please?

[Coursework.info]

Need more help? You could get help with this question at MarkedbyTeachers.com

[dan_black]

cant help you im afraid, not studied criminal law as of yet at uni so can only rely on a level memory, and as far as i am aware we never studied reckless manslaughter. do you mean gross negligence manslaughter possibly?

[Triplet1]

(Original post by dan_black)
cant help you im afraid, not studied criminal law as of yet at uni so can only rely on a level memory, and as far as i am aware we never studied reckless manslaughter. do you mean gross negligence manslaughter possibly?

No gross negligence manslaugter is another form of manslaughter.
Thank you for trying to help


Wow you studying law at cardiff!? I want to go to cardiff but not to study law. Do you like it there?

[LawQueen]

Reckless manslaughter? Surely that's unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter or gross negligence manslaughter. Do you have any cases on it?

[Triplet1]

(Original post by Root)
Reckless manslaughter? Surely that's unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter or gross negligence manslaughter. Do you have any cases on it?

Lidar 2000
Adomako 1995

[steve2005]

(Original post by Triplet1)
I'm studying A2 OCR criminal law and i'm struggling a bit with reckless manslaughter and cant find very much on it.
Can anyone help me please?

This might help
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/cha.../homicide8.htm

[LawQueen]

(Original post by Triplet1)
Lidar 2000
Adomako 1995

Adomako sounds like gross negligence manslaughter to me. The anaethatist was grossly negligent in his practise which caused the victim's death. In Lider I think it was either an employer or company who were grossly negligent to employees/customers.

[Triplet1]

(Original post by Root)
Adomako sounds like gross negligence manslaughter to me. The anaethatist was grossly negligent in his practise which caused the victim's death. In Lider I think it was either an employer or company who were grossly negligent to employees/customers.

Reckless manslaughter - it was unclear if this form of manslaughter still existed after Adomako. However in Lida he C of A dismissed an appeal which was based ona misdirection, the trail judge had refereed to recklessnes not gross negligence. The judge was correct with his vew.

Lidar was were a guy was dragged under the wheels of a car.

They are thinking about changing its name to Reckless killing now.

thank you for the link steve 2005 i will look now

[LawQueen]

(Original post by Triplet1)
Reckless manslaughter - it was unclear if this form of manslaughter still existed after Adomako. However in Lida he C of A dismissed an appeal which was based ona misdirection, the trail judge had refereed to recklessnes not gross negligence. The judge was correct with his vew.

Lidar was were a guy was dragged under the wheels of a car.

They are thinking about changing its name to Reckless killing now.

thank you for the link steve 2005 i will look now

Oh yeah, the guy started driving the car with the victim kind of half in.

Sorry, can't help-we haven't done reckless manslaughter at uni; only unlawful and dangerous act and gross negligence.

[Triplet1]

(Original post by Root)
Oh yeah, the guy started driving the car with the victim kind of half in.

Sorry, can't help-we haven't done reckless manslaughter at uni; only unlawful and dangerous act and gross negligence.

thats ok

[ithink]

(Original post by LawQueen)
Adomako sounds like gross negligence manslaughter to me. The anaethatist was grossly negligent in his practise which caused the victim's death. In Lider I think it was either an employer or company who were grossly negligent to employees/customers.

indeed, but in the desenting judgements they said alot about reckelssness being another form of manslaughter. you want to look at hyam [1975] too

[marcjacob]

It's about Cunningham recklessness. You forsee a risk, take it anyway, which leads to death.

[d5e8t4d4w8r]

have a look at Cunningham (think its 1954?)with the gas pipe leak - As far as I can remember 'reckless manslaughter' has now been abolished but did used to exist where you know the risk but take it anyway. HTH x

[marcjacob]

Nope, we were taught it this year. No one said it's been abolished. Provaction has been changed to loss of self control. Maybe that's what you were thinking of?

[SP9three]

Adomako was a gross negligence case. As for reckless manslaughter, there is no confirmation as to whether it is still a crime or whether it would just be gross negligence. Until a case regarding reckless manslaughter goes to the Supreme court, we will not know whether it's still regarded as a crime or not.If a case goes to the Supreme court they will lay down the law on reckless manslaughter My teacher said if you ever get asked about the types of involuntary manslaughter, put recklessness down but with a question mark next to it and explain that until a reckless manslaughter case goes to the Supreme court, it's not clear whether it's still a crime

[OLawyer]

(Original post by LawQueen)
Reckless manslaughter? Surely that's unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter or gross negligence manslaughter. Do you have any cases on it?

Since the landmark case of Adomako [1994], reckless manslaughter has been pretyt much replaced by gross negligence manslaughter- See Lord Mackay's test. Reckless manslaughter is limited to "motor" manslaughter cases, such as the case of Lidar [2000].

[Homebrewstress]

Right I can guarentee you everything I say will be correct, some of the above certainly isn't so if i contradict any of it..listen to me.

The reason you can't find much on reckless manslaughter is because there isn't much Lidar is a case about reckless manslaughter, Adomako is more GN manslaughter.

Recklessness is subjective. Gross negligence is easier for a prosecution to prove than recklessness, this is because recklessness requires subjective foresight of risk, and gross negligence requires an obvious risk. Prosecution will tend to go for gross negligence, as this is far easier to convict on, recklessness and gross negligence are not separate categories.

Lidar (2000) 4 Archbold News – After a fight victim was hanging on to the defendant’s car, defendant drove off and victim died. Prosecution had to prove Lidar foresaw a serious risk of victim being killed or seriously injured, however had they have just called it gross negligence this would of been unnecessary, the reason this is the only negligence case you can find is because few prosecutors are stupid enough to seek a conviction for it.

[Homebrewstress]

Right I can guarentee you everything I say will be correct, some of the above certainly isn't so if i contradict any of it..listen to me.

The reason you can't find much on reckless manslaughter is because there isn't much Lidar is a case about reckless manslaughter, Adomako is more GN manslaughter.

Recklessness is subjective. Gross negligence is easier for a prosecution to prove than recklessness, this is because recklessness requires subjective foresight of risk, and gross negligence requires an obvious risk. Prosecution will tend to go for gross negligence, as this is far easier to convict on, recklessness and gross negligence are not separate categories.

Lidar (2000) 4 Archbold News – After a fight victim was hanging on to the defendant’s car, defendant drove off and victim died. Prosecution had to prove Lidar foresaw a serious risk of victim being killed or seriously injured, however had they have just called it gross negligence this would of been unnecessary, the reason this is the only negligence case you can find is because few prosecutors are stupid enough to seek a conviction for it.