Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Guys im struggling a bit please can you help me with this scenario. Dan beats his wife and tells his wife she has more coming in morning. She kills him whilst he is asleep. She is also clinically depressed discuss any liability for dans wife
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The main points of discussion here would be the partial defences, loss of control and diminished responsibility. She has committed murder and there is no dispute over this so it only needs to be mentioned briefly.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'll give you a more detailed answer if you still need it later when I have more time on my hands
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks for the reply. Can you tell me please me if it Would it make a difference if Dan didnt die but died later as a result of poor standard of care by a doctor and wherby there wasnt any mitigating circumstances from his wife. So she intended to kill him but he died as a result of doctors
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It depends which case is more relevant to your scenario, as there are two mains ones. The first is Smith (1959) where the victim was stabbed and suffered a collapsed lung and died due to improper treatment. The defendant was still guilty because the stab wound was the overwhelming cause of death.

    The second is Jordan (1956) where the defendant stabbed the victim. The victim was treated in hospital but had an allergic reaction to some antibiotics. One doctor stopped the use of them but another doctor ordered a large dose be given. The victim died of an allergic reaction and this was held to be a break in the chain of causation.

    Also, I think you're getting your vocab slightly confused. Mitigating circumstances are what the judge must take into account when deciding the sentence of the defendant.

    Hope I helped X
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh thanks for your help
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    As Becca has already mentioned, the key issues in this scenario are murder, LOC and DR.

    I’d approach this scenario by defining murder, and using the case of Martin in relation to the AR of the offence; i.e. that excessive force used in self defence is unreasonable and constitutes an unlawful killing, which applies to Dan’s wife, because she killed him whilst he was asleep in response to him beating her, which is disproportionate with
    regards to the proportionality test.

    Then, I’d use AG Ref. No. 3 of 1,994 (1997) to emphasise that Dan was clearly a reasonable creature in being at the time of the killing, because he was independent of his mother for survival as a healthy adult.

    Next, I’d state that there isn’t anything to prove under the Queen’s peace and conclude that Dan’s wife satisfies the AR of murder.

    I’d then define the MR of murder and use the case of Mohan to show that Dan’s wife directly intended to kill Dan, because he beat her and threatened that he would do so in the morning, and she also murdered him whilst he was asleep. Therefore, she’d be criminally liable for the murder of Dan.

    For LOC, I’d define the defence using the case of Richens; i.e. that the D must lose control from a subjective point of view and need only lose some control, which applies to Dan’s wife, who was bound to lose some control after being beat up and threatened with further violence in the morning.

    Then, I’d use the case of Ahluwalia to show that fear of future violence isn’t sufficient for the fear trigger, which applies to Dan’s wife, because she feared further violence from Dan in the morning, after being told “you’ve got more coming”.

    I might also use the case of Thorton to argue that a significant lapse of time between the trigger and actual LOC lessens the D’s chance of using the defence; i.e. Dan’s wife would less likely be allowed the defence, because she feared violence after Dan beat her up and threatened her with further violence, but only killed him later on, when he was asleep.

    Finally, I’d use Jersey v Holley to show that a person of Dan’s wife’s age and sex in the same circumstances would’ve acted in the same way/similarly, because they would’ve been fearful of Dan fulfilling his threats and therefore want to attack him before he attacked them.

    However, due to issues regarding the cases of Ahluwalia and Thorton, I’d conclude that Dan’s wife doesn’t satisfy all the necessary parts of LOC and therefore wouldn’t be able to use the defence and would remain criminally liable for Dan’s murder.

    Alternatively, I’d argue DR, using the cases of Gomez, to show that clinical depression would be regarded abnormal/unusual by the reasonable man, and Byrne, to show that the recognised medical condition needn’t exist from birth or be permanent, as long as it exists at the time of the killing - which it clearly did in Dan’s wife’s case, to make her feel that she could only kill Dan when he was asleep. That’s how I’d approach abnormality of mind.

    Then I’d support the fact that clinical depression is a recognised medical condition, by using the case of Gittens.

    Next, I’d use Lloyd to state that the recognised medical condition must substantially (meaning ‘more than minimally, less than totally’) impair the D as to one of three things. I’d argue that Dan’s wife was substantially impaired as to forming a rational judgement (Simcox), because she her clinical depression affected her to the extent that she couldn’t process Dan’s threats and therefore resorted to killing him.

    Finally, I’d conclude that this provides a reasonable explanation for the killing on balance, and therefore Dan’s wife would be able to use the defence and be acquitted of murder and charged with voluntary manslaughter instead, if she was successful with it.

    I’m sorry for such a longwinded answer, but I hope it’s of some help to you!
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: May 12, 2013

University open days

  1. Loughborough University
    General Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 21 Sep '18
  2. University of Cambridge
    Churchill College Undergraduate
    Fri, 21 Sep '18
  3. Richmond, The American International University in London
    Undergraduate Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 21 Sep '18
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.