Unlawful Act Manslaughter case facts.

The Unlawful Act: Two friends were playing with a revolver which they honestly believed would not fire. D pulled trigger and killed V. Held that the D had not done an unlawful act, pointing of the gun at V was not an assault as V didn't fear any violence from D.

Dangerous unlawful act: D had a violent argument with V about his inability to satisfy her, he knocked her unconscious but believed she was dead and threw her into a river where she drowned. Held that the D was liable for UAM as he had committed an unlawful act that was dangerous because according to the sober and reasonable man, there was a risk of some harm occurring.

Dangerous Unlawful Act: D pushed into a queue and punched a man who had told him off. The man fell backwards and knocked the V over, V died. Held that D was convicted of UAM as he had unlawfully punched a man which is classed as dangerous.

The unlawful act must cause death: D gave V a syringe containing heroin which the V injected and died. D was convicted of UAM as the CA decided self-injection was unlawful. Held that the HoL's squashed his conviction and stated that:
-If D supplies and injects V then D will be liable as chain of causation isn't broken

-If D supplies and V self-injects then D will not be liable for the death as the chain of causation is broken.

-Exceptions are where the user was young or misinformed on the contents of the drug.

Mens Rea for UAM: D's were a 15yo boy who threw heavy concrete slabs onto a train below, killing a guard. HoL's held that they were liable as it isn't necessary to prove that the D foresaw any harm from this act. Reasonable adult would see a risk of some harm and the age of the boys was held to be irrelevant.