Other questions in this quiz

2. Under s.54 Coroners and Justice Act 2009, what reasons can D not be convicted of murder?

  • The reasonable man should not be applied in the circumstances
  • If D was intoxicated at the time of the killing, he/she cannot be convicted of Murder.
  • Killing resulted from D's loss of self control, it had a qualifying trigger and whether a person similar to D would have reacted in the same way
  • There is no qualifying trigger to make Murder a viable conviction

3. What does Fenton (1975) say about self-induced intoxication?

  • If the taking of a first drink was not involuntary, then the whole of the drinking on that day is not involuntary and as such, the defence will fail due to self induced intoxication.
  • Self induced intoxication cannot produce an abnormality of the mind. Intoxication is not an inherent cause
  • Alcoholism is not a valid condition where self induced intoxication is involving.
  • Where self induced intoxication is the case, there must be a pre-existing history of alcohol dependency

4. In relation to D's substantial impairment of rational judgment, exercise of self control and understanding the nature of D's conduct, what does R v Lloyd (1967) say in regards to impairment?

  • It must be considered that it has to be more than trivial but not necessarily that of total impairment or retardation of mental development
  • It is not a question for neither jury nor judge, but for that of a medical expert in the field to define whether the impairment was more than trivial
  • It is a question for the jury - doesn't have to be total impairment but it must be more than trivial
  • It is a case of the severity of the impairment, insufficient impairment would not count towards a defence

5. Under the legislation covering Diminished Responsibility, what can stop a murder conviction?

  • Abnormality of mind (whether arising from a condition of arrrested or retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or induced by disease or injury)
  • Abnormality of mind which substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing
  • Abnormality of mental functioning which arose from a recognised medical condition.
  • Abnormality of mental functioning which removes D's logical reasoning to act in a way which the reasonable man would

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal Law resources »