Case Study on Criminal Law
8 Pages1782 Words221 Views
Univesity of Hertfordshire
Added on 2020-05-28
Case Study on Criminal Law
Univesity of Hertfordshire
Added on 2020-05-28
ShareRelated Documents
Running head: CRIMINAL LAWCriminal LawName of the StudentNam of the UniversityAuthor Note
1CRIMINAL LAWQuestion a)In the given case study emphasis has been laid upon the issues relating to the unlawfulact of manslaughter. It is noteworthy to mention that for the purpose of the issue, the conceptsrelating to unlawful act and unlawful manslaughter needs to be discussed. According to theprovisions of Section 1 of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007,unlawful manslaughter can be defined as the act committed by a person causing death to theother person with the means of dangerous and unlawful act. In this regard an unlawful act onmanslaughter is established when any act is based upon criminal activity. However for the act tobe unlawful and related to manslaughter it is necessary that the act must be:Dangerous.Must give rise to substantial cause of death.Mens Rea. It can be stated that manslaughter gives rise to the concept of unlawful act which isassociated with a criminal activity. In R v Mitchell1 the Court of Appeal held that in order toestablish the criminal activity of manslaughter it is mandatory to prove that the suspect haspledged an unlawful act, the activity was so dangerous that any person with sound mind wouldconsider it to be harmful, the act can cause substantial death, that he crime was committed withan intention to cause harm. The Law Commission in its report- Legislating the CriminalCode Involuntary Manslaughter 19962, analyzed the leading offences associated with theconcept of manslaughter and established the principles of constructive manslaughter. As statedby the Law Commission, it is not possible for a reasonable man to foresee the consequences ofhis act. In other words, a person should not be held liable for the death of another person which1[1983] QB 7412'Still Killing With Impunity: Corporate Criminal Law Reform In The UK' (Taylor & Francis, 2018)<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14774003.2013.11667790> accessed 6 January2018.
2CRIMINAL LAWhe did not intend or envisage and which would not have been expected by a person of soundmind. In the given scenario it can be observed that Keith and Ginger being heroin addictsexperimented on Kurt and Janis with heroin with their consent. However it can be seen that thedose of heroin as prepared and injected by Keith was contaminated and as a result of this bothJanis and Kurt died as a result of heroin overdose. It was seen that later on Keith attempted todispose the dead bodies of Kurt and Janis. Based on the understandings of the provided casestudy, it can be stated that Keith has committed unlawful act of manslaughter associated withdangerous and unlawful activity which in modern context is defined as constructivemanslaughter. In the given case study it is mentioned that Keith injected the dose of heroin intoboth Kurt and Janis with their prior consent. However it has been established in R v Cato3thatthe prior approval of the sufferer shall not avert the act from being unlawful. In R v Cato, it wasseen that Mr. Cato and the victim prepared their own heroin doses and injected into each other.In this case Mr. Cato was held liable for manslaughter and was convicted according to theprovisions of Section 23 of the Offences against the Person Act 18614. It was retained by theJudge that heroin is a dangerous substance which can cause death if overused in any way. Itwas held that the injection of heroin is associated with the cause of death and in order toestablish it, it is important to trace out that whether manslaughter has taken place or not. In thiscase the victim’s consent taken by Mr. Cato before the injection of heroin however it was heldby the jurists that such consent was purely irrelevant in this case. Mr. Cato claimed that heroinis not a noxious thing and do not give rise to malicious administration under the provisions ofSection 23 of the Offences against the Person Act 18615. It was held by the Judge in R v Cato3[1976] 1 WLR 1104 'Serious Violence By People With Mental Illnessjournal Of Interpersonal Violence - SandraFlynn, Cathryn Rodway, Louis Appleby, Jenny Shaw, 2014' (Journals.sagepub.com, 2018)<http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260513507133> accessed 6 January 2018.5 Unlawful And Dangerousthe Journal Of Criminal Law - Tony Storey, 2017'(Journals.sagepub.com,2018)
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Involuntary Manslaughter Case Study Systemlg...
|8
|1572
|19
Reflection on R v Kennedy - Case Commentarylg...
|6
|1306
|46
Criminal Law: Murder and Defenceslg...
|12
|3002
|428
Criminal Law: Elements of Murder and Available Defenseslg...
|6
|1406
|67