Diminished Responsibility

Where is the law set out?

S52 of Coroners & Justice Act 2009

Criteria for defence

• D suffered from an abnormality of mental functioning

• Caused by a recognised medical condition

• Substantially impaired Ds responsibility for their actions

• Provides an explanation for D’s acts or omissions

R v Ali, R v Jordan

Court said it would be too difficult for the prosecution to prove D didn’t have DR so D must prove they have it

Abnormality of mental functioning

In R v Byrne “a state of mind so different from that of ordinary human beings that the reasonable man would find it abnormal”

R v Byrne

Had uncontrollable sexual desires & killed a woman

R v Aluwhalia

D suffered from battered woman syndrome

R v Reynolds

D suffered from post-natal depression

R v Grey

• D killed V who stepped into path of his car

• D suffered from PTSD after being a passenger in the 1999 Paddington Rail Crash

R v Wilkinson

D killed V while suffering from PTSD due to serving in the Afghanistan war

Alcohol Dependence Syndrome

• Classed as involuntary drinking & abnormality of the mind

R v Tandy

• D killed V whilst drunk

• Intoxication can only be abnormality of the mind if involuntary & caused brain damage

R v Wood

• D was an alcoholic & killed V

• Involuntary drinking so was classed as abnormality of the mind

R v Golds

Substantially doesn’t need to be total impairment of their responsibility but must be more than trivial

What did Lord Parker say in R v Byrne?

• Substantial impaired mental responsibility is lacking the ability to:

• Understand the nature of their conduct

• Form a rational judgement

• Exercise self-control

R v Codere (understanding nature of conduct)

D cut wife’s throat believing he was cutting bread

R v Di Duca

Transient state of intoxication isn’t abnormality of mental functioning

R v Dowds

• D killed V after drinking

• Voluntary drinking isn’t abnormality of mental functioning

R v Dietschmann

• D had an adjustment disorder & was grieving a lost relative

• Killed V whilst drunk

What was the question for the Jury in R v Dietschmann?

“Has D satisfied you that despite the drink his mental abnormality substantially impaired his responsibility for the killing of D?”

R v Hendy

D was intoxicated but also had a psychopathic disorder & brain damage - murder was quashed for manslaughter

R v Robson

D was intoxicated but had a stress disorder - murder was quashed for manslaughter