The Law of Manslaughter

Essay # 46034

Law > Criminal

An examination of the definition of manslaughter and the current British law pertaining to it.

2,240 words () | 7 sources | APA | 2003 United Kingdom

Paper Summary:

This paper shows how of all crimes manslaughter appears to afford most difficulties of definition, for it concerns homicide in so many and so varying conditions. It looks at how liability for manslaughter can arise from an unintentional killing caused by negligence ie. the omission of a duty to take care. It deals with the definition of manslaughter, the appropriate test and the jury direction. It also discusses the creation of a new head of common law manslaughter, reckless manslaughter and the implications of this turning of the law. Through examples of court cases, it analyzes how proposed reforms will not only introduce much needed clarity but will allow the law to operate much more effectively as a mechanism of censure by reducing the net of liability to those truly responsible for the deaths they cause.

From the Paper:

"Lord Roskill in Seymour , took recklessness to be the most suitable term to express the kind of culpability required for this head of manslaughter. In this case the trial judge had directed the jury that they should convict if they were satisfied that he D had caused death, and had been reckless in doing so, recklessness here having the meaning attributed to in Lawrence . The House of Lords held, dismissing D's appeal, that the elements of common law manslaughter and motor manslaughter under the Road Traffic Act 1972 were the same, and the direction in R v. Lawrence was appropriate, save that it was also appropriate to point out to the jury that the risk of death being caused by the manner of the driving must be very high. The prosecution might charge either offense, but if both were charged, the prosecution must elect, upon which charge to proceed."