Search

Michelle Carter's texts instructing her mentally ill online boyfriend to commit suicide offended the social moral code. But the law does not categorize all morally reprehensible behavior as criminal. Commonwealth v. Carter is unprecedented in manslaughter law because Carter was convicted on the theory that she was virtually present as opposed to physically present--at the crime scene. The court's reasoning is expansive, as the framework it employs is excessively vague and does not provide fair notice to the public of which actions constitute involuntary manslaughter. Disturbingly, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the trial court's logic. This Article concludes that a conviction based upon a virtual-presence theory is unconstitutional, as it is void-for-vagueness. Hypotheticals are provided to illustrate how the Carter framework is unworkable when applied to online relationships based on electronic communications. State legislatures, not courts, should regulate this area, providing clear rules on when electronic encouragement of suicide violates the law. States can consider a physical-presence requirement and prohibit prosecutions on this basis. Or, legislators can borrow from aiding and abetting principles to expand their special relationship statutes to include online relationships, creating a duty to report when encouraging another to commit suicide. In either case, the law will provide citizens with bright-line rules to forecast when electronic conduct is subject to criminal sanction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter are the two properly recognised types of involuntary manslaughter under the law as currently best stated. One possible lacuna, sometimes presented as a reason for these two recognised types of manslaughter being arguably insufficient, relates to those reckless omissions which fall short of gross negligence and which may appear to be excluded by case law from unlawful act manslaughter as being an omission rather than an act. This article seeks to demonstrate that there is no such lacuna and that, properly understood, the case law does not preclude liability for the "commission by omission" of unlawful act manslaughter and that consequently, on this ground at least, a third category, "reckless manslaughter", is neither needed nor desirable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The complexity and diversity of unlawful killings -- particularly those involving mentally impaired offenders -- does not fit neatly across the binary distinction of offence/defence that structures criminal law. This is demonstrated in the Australian State of Victoria, where cognitively impaired homicide offenders who fail to meet the strict remit of the mental impairment defence have no (partial) defence or offence available to them which adequately captures their levels of criminal responsibility, moral agency and culpability. This makes the sentencing of such offenders not only particularly complex but means that the only stage in which both moral and legal culpability can be considered is in mitigation. This article argues that a progressive framework is needed to permit a small minority of (mentally impaired) homicide offenders to be simultaneously inculpated and (partially) exculpated. Accordingly, we propose introducing a model of diminished culpability manslaughter in Victoria, drawing from Loughnan's seminal reconceptualisation of 'diminished responsibility manslaughter' as an offence-cum-defence, which renders the diminished accused differently liable. Informed by a study of all homicide cases (n=647) sentenced in Victoria between 1 January 2000 and 31 July 2017, we argue that this model would not revoke legal capacity and would instead enhance the legitimacy and coherence of criminal law procedures, allowing a wider range of more legitimate convictions and reflective sentencing dispositions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following a recent high-profile case in which a regulatory, strict liability offence was utilised to provide the "unlawful act" in unlawful act manslaughter, this article examines what is a sufficiently "unlawful" act to underpin that offence. It argues that the breadth of offences that can now be used to found an unlawful act manslaughter charge has led to a departure from the fair-labelling principle and traditional notions of culpability. Even the traditional argument, that the requirement of dangerousness sufficiently circumscribes those offences that qualify, has been weakened as that requirement has been diluted, and no longer provides adequate protection. Considering the legal position when a death resulted from a collision with a bike which did not comply with a Regulation, this article argues that Hying to use unlawful act manslaughter to fill a lacuna in the law relating to fatal collisions involving cyclists risks unfairness to defendants through the unwarranted expansion of liability. New legislation is likely to be the most appropriate way properly to criminalise riding falling below the standard of a reasonable cyclist, but not amounting to gross negligence, that causes death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights the distinguishes between murder and manslaughter; reports concerns the form of mens rea for murder that involves an intention to cause serious harm; and mentions provisions in present law on murder in England and Wales.

The article discusses the effects of gross criminal negligence on professional tribunals. Topics discussed include information on the gross negligence manslaughter; need of professional standards and conduct in medical practice; and the death of the victim due to the breach of duty and the patient safety culture.

The article focuses on several cases of European Court of Human Rights which include Case of Ceesay v. Austria, Case of Lopes de Sousa Fernandes v. Portugal and Case of Nedescu v. Romania. Topics discussed include conviction of drug trafficking and sentenced to seven months' imprisonment with violation of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), issues regarding manslaughter with the criminal investigation and Case of Nedescu v. Romania on ovarian stimulation and in vitro fertilisation.

The article reports the decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in the case including "R. v Rose (Honey Maria)" concerning gross negligence manslaughter; breach of statutory duty; and foreseeability of serious and obvious risk of death.

The article reports the decision of the British Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in the cases "R. v Kay (Robert)" and "R v Joyce (Trevor)" concerning issues manslaughter and diminished responsibility.

The article discusess laws governing reckless manslaughter in the English criminal law, and mentions situations of manslaughter such as defendant's act causing the death of another person; and being aware at the time of acting that death and serious injury existed.

The article focuses on the decision of Great Britain Court of Appeal in the case R. v Blackman (Alexander Wayne) on homicide and diminished responsibility under Homicide Act 1957, as amended by Coroners and Justice Act 2009 with power to substitute verdict of manslaughter for that of murder.

This article examines the operation of the reformed English diminished responsibility plea in mercy killer cases. In particular, it makes three claims. First, it predicts that—like its predecessor—the revised doctrine will be stretched, where necessary, to accommodate these offenders. This is because (i) normative arguments remain for convicting them of manslaughter instead of murder and (ii) other partial defence routes will usually be unavailable. Secondly, it contends that such pragmatism will now be facilitated by a disconnect between (i) the defence’s post-reform narrowing and (ii) its ongoing interpretive flexibility. Thirdly, given that disconnect, it suggests that this pragmatism will be problematic. Notably, it will (i) compromise the plea’s newfound coherence and (ii) exacerbate unfair labelling of mercy killers. Ultimately, and more broadly, these difficulties reinforce recent calls for further homicide law reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on implications for the criminal justice system and the problematic prosecution of an Asian American police officer in the case the man was convicted of manslaughter, which carries a fifteen year maximum penalty. It mentions the officer was convicted of, criminally negligent homicide, require a gross deviation from the standard of care. It also mentions trigger of his pistol, there would still be no basis for homicide liability.

The article focuses on the decision of Great Britain's Court of Appeal in the case R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) regarding the conviction of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and sentencing under wrong medical diagnosis under Mental Health Act.

The article examines laws that defines involuntary manslaughter resulted due to suicide. Topics discussed include increased number of suicide in the U.S.; different types of conducts by the defendant's level of participation in the other person's suicide; and alternative for prosecuting involuntary manslaughter.

A personal narrative is presented which explores the author's experience of testifying against himself to help an intoxication manslaughter case.

The article reports the decision of a British Court of Appeal in the case 'R. v Bell (Martin Christopher)' in which the court dismissed the appeal of claimant seeking reduction in his life sentence imposed following a guilty plea to manslaughter. Topics discussed include the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR); discretionary life sentences; an introduction of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

In England and Wales, strangulation is one of the principal methods men use to kill women in intimate relationships. Over the past three decades, this method of killing accounts for up to 37 per cent of deaths of women by male partners. Strangulation is both gender and context specific making it a high risk factor affecting the lives of women. The lack of understanding of the seriousness of strangulation, together with the legal construction of intention allows men to disavow murder and be found guilty of only unlawful act manslaughter. In most American and Australian Federal States and in Canada and New Zealand, legislation criminalises strangulation and is also an aggravating factor in sentencing in both non-fatal and fatal cases. This article makes a plea for law reform in England and Wales and a challenge to the prevailing discourse in criminal law and justice which continues to treat male body force in strangulation as less heinous than other forms of body force and weapons in fatal and non-fatal assaults against women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the Crimes Amendment (Abolition of Defensive Homicide) Act that abolished Australian state of Victoria's general partial defense of defensive homicide and replaced the existing statutory self-defense in manslaughter provisions and also mentions the need of partial defense.

The article offers information on the history, drawbacks and legal reforms to prosecution of manslaughter by criminal negligence of physicians in various jurisdictions in Australia. It discusses the case of Jayant Patel, the Director of Surgery at Bundaberg Base Hospital, Queensland, which reflects prosecutorial failure of the criminal justice system of Australia to address the fraud charges associated with deaths.

The article offers information on the judicial decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in the case of Commonwealth v. Walczak, in which the Court affirmed the dismissal of a second-degree murder indictment against juvenile defendant Javon Walczak after analyzing the evidence. Topics discussed include commonwealth laws for murder prosecutions against juveniles and legal instructions to grand jury for reducing the charge of second-degree murder to voluntary manslaughter.

The article discusses the decision of the New Mexico Supreme Court on the case State v. Gonzales. Topics discussed include prosecution of the case related to the claims of vehicular manslaughter, litigation for child abuse by endangerment resulting in death and judicial review of the history of criminal joinder rule in context of the double jeopardy clause.

The rules of domestic criminal law and regulations of international criminal law protect the most important of fundamental human rights approved and guaranteed constitutionally in Romania, in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. The analysis of the offenses relating to murder of the new Criminal Code envisages firstly, the reorganization of the texts that incriminate the criminal offences directed against human life and, secondly, highlights the news targeting the offenses of first-degree murder and sentencing regime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay analyzes Margot Macomber's culpability in the shooting of her husband from a legal perspective. The authors situate the story in the contemporary legal context of Kenya in relation to African customary law, British law, and the American legal system. The authors consider the relevancy of newspaper coverage of several Kenyan homicide cases Hemingway was likely to have heard or read about during his first safari. Margot would likely be charged with manslaughter under British Law in the early 1930s. Significantly, under the manslaughter charge her intent in the shooting would be irrelevant, and her conviction would depend on whether or not the shooting amounted to culpable negligence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pharmacy originates from a background of medication compounding and supply. More recently, this role has developed away from an absolute focus on the supply of pharmaceuticals with, for example, the advent of pharmacist prescribing. Nevertheless, for a majority of the profession, medication supply remains a core activity. Regulation of the pharmacy profession is now the responsibility of the General Pharmaceutical Council, although up until 27 September 2010, this role fell to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB). Before this change, in one of the most high-profile legal cases involving a pharmacist in a professional capacity, R. v Lee, a pharmacist was prosecuted firstly for gross negligence manslaughter, later revised to offences under the Medicines Act 1968, for a single error relating to medication supply, and was given a suspended custodial sentence. Offences against sections 64 or 85 of the Medicines Act are absolute offences and there is no due diligence defence. Prosecution of a pharmacist for the supply of incorrect medication may seem a measured course of action to protect the public from the wrongful supply of potent pharmacotherapeutic agents; however, further analysis of Lee indicates that this approach may be counterproductive. An appeal of the original conviction in the Lee case has resulted in a clarification of the interpretation of section 85(5); however currently, prosecutions under section 64 are still a possibility. Owing to the seriousness of a criminal conviction under section 64, this continuation will potentially stifle the profession's ability to learn from dispensing errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the application of domestic criminal statutes to near miss maritime incidents and to maritime collisions. It examines the offences used in cases of maritime incidents, the relevance of present statutory law, and the problem areas in the domestic criminal law application to mariners. Topics also include the common law regarding the involuntary manslaughter, the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, and the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (IRPCS).

The article discusses several court cases including Cruzan v. Harmon filed in North Carolina's Supreme Court, Cruzan v. Director and Washington v. Glucksberg filed in the U.S. Supreme Court regarding assisted suicides. Topics discussed include use of the establishment clause, narrowing and retention of capital punishment, reduction in the rate of capital punishment and the courts decision in case of sanctity of life and criminal homicide laws.

The article offers information on the High Court of Australia case Munda v Western Australia in which the High Court dismissed an appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which had allowed an appeal against the original sentence imposed on Ernest Munda for manslaughter. Topics discussed include crimes by Aboriginal Australians, criminal law of Australia regarding crimes committed by Aboriginal Australians and criminal law regarding manslaughter.

One hundred and seventy five undergraduates (105 females) read a fictional criminal trial summary of a parricide case in which the juvenile defendant alleged sexual abuse or physical abuse or did not allege abuse. An allegation of either type of abuse led to a greater likelihood of a manslaughter conviction than a murder conviction and greater pro-child ratings (e.g., sympathy toward the defendant) compared to no abuse allegations. Specific evaluations of the defendant mediated the verdict results. In addition, there was no support for the claim that perceptions are more heinous for sexual abuse than physical abuse allegations and only limited support that perceptions for this type of case result in women being more pro-child defendant than men. The discussion focuses on how abuse allegations impact jurors' decision-making processes in parricide cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the judgment of Australian High Court in two cases Fingleton v The Queen and Patel v The Queen wherein physician Jayant Patel was convicted of manslaughter of his three patients. It mentions that emphasis of physician case was on protection of whistleblower against the physician. It argues that an understanding of public sector employment law is required and the way it relates to criminal prosecution of public servants and judges.

The article focuses on the England and Wales Court of Appeals cases of R. v. Dawes, R. v. Hatter, and R. v. Bowyer, wherein the Court considered the British Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to resolve problems arising from the loss of control defence. It informs that the Court dismissed appeals of the defendants D, H, and B, on the basis that when a person killed another person in a desire for revenge, he should not be convicted of murder, but of manslaughter.

The article presents information on the England and Wales Court of Appeals case of R. v. Phillips, regarding gross negligence manslaughter and possession of heroin. In the case, a young man at an appellant's place was found dead because of overdosing of heroin and the appellant buried the deceased's body in tarpaulin before laying it in a back wall. The appellant was convicted of manslaughter by gross negligence since he owed him a duty of care and for distorting the course of justice.

An individual death is no doubt significant on a personal level, but the magnitude of import felt by society as a whole is reflected in our social and legal reflexes. When a company manufactures an unsafe product, we call for class actions and tighten regulations. We legislate punishment for certain crimes against the individual and create exceptions to constitutional rights based on public safety. Yet, driving under the influence persists as a social norm, despite the predictable and preventable nature of the resulting deaths. Our social and legal reflexes are weak. The consequences of the offense, even when resulting in death, are slight, almost ceremonial nods to the intentional act and the individual cost of life. This Note argues that punishing OUI Manslaughter lightly as an "unintentional" act, distinguishable from murder, is misguided; that vehicular manslaughter while under the influence consists of more than one intentional act, thus exceeding recklessness and should be recognized for these intents and punished accordingly; and that current punishments are not consistent with any of the four major theories of punishment. This Note discusses a variety of state and federal perspectives, but focuses on Massachusetts law for statutory analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the decision of the Rhode Island Supreme Court in State v. Diaz in which the defendant Juan Diaz was charged of a second-degree murder. Diaz was convicted of a second-degree murder of his girl friend, who was shot dead with a firearm and instructed to the police that it was an involuntary manslaughter. The court after analyzing the presented evidence found Diaz guilty of second-degree murder and affirmed the trial court's denial of motion of judgment of acquittal.

The article focuses on the constitutional requirements of the crime of manslaughter in Canadian law with reference to the Supreme Court of Canada case R v. Creighton. Topics discussed include the potential impact of changing the mens rea standard to objectionable foreseeability of death, laws governing murder offences in the Criminal Code and section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the application of the thin skull doctrine in criminal cases.

The article offers information on the judgment of High Court of Australia SZOQQ v. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship regarding status of protection obligations owed to appellant by the Australian government under the Migration Act of 1958. It analyzes that appellant was an Indonesian national, who was granted protection visa in Australia but later in 2001, he was charged of manslaughter and sentenced imprisonment. The court held that no protection obligation was owed to the appellant.

The article discusses a court case that concerned an appeal against a ruling at Newcastle Crown Court that it would not be open to the jury to convict either respondent of manslaughter. In R v JM and SM, the trial judge halted the proceedings based on the meaning of the term "dangerousness" in the context of constructive manslaughter. The case R v Church is also discussed.

The article discusses the High Court of Australia's case Patel v. The Queen, wherein the appellant, a surgeon at a regional hospital in Queensland, was tried before a jury on charges of manslaughter. The appellant's motion to quash the convictions and ordering a new trial was allowed, and the decision of the Queensland's Supreme Court was reversed. It offers information on several court cases which were referred in this case including Callaghan v. The Queen, R v. Lavender, and R v. G.

The law recognizes the frailty of human nature by mitigating murder to manslaughter when committed in the heat of passion or under extreme emotional disturbance. Evolutionary analysis entails the scientific study of the principles of human nature. Yet, the law's understanding of human nature is not congruent with evolutionary analysis. To be legally provoked under common law for manslaughter mitigation, a homicide must be in response to one offour kinds of provocation.' adultery, mutual combat, false arrest, and violent assault. And under adultery, only sexual infidelity counts. Sexual infidelity is not the only type of infidelity that can push a person into a homicidal rage, and while American jurisdictions have started moving away from the rigid categories, sexual infidelity remains a paradigmatic approach for mitigation. The Model Penal Code attempted to make the law more contextual, but it created a new series of adjudications that are expansive and also incongruent with evolutionary analysis. This Comment addresses the incongruence of both the common law and the Model Penal Code-which produce gender disparity in manslaughter doctrine-with evolutionary analysis. By exploring why sexual infidelity would provoke passion sufficient for homicidal rage, the Comment develops a mitigating standard for adultery that is consistent with evolutionary analysis and notions of gender equality. It uses evolutionary analysis to determine which universally recognizable forms of jealousy and related passion-laden mental states should also be sufficient provocation to deserve that same mitigation. The passionate response to sexual infidelity is just one adaptive solution to a threat against a male's reproductive fitness. However, in flagrante delicto does not take the passion-invoking circumstances of the female end of the same evolutionary spectrum into account. Our ancestral mothers faced a different set of evolutionary challenges against their reproductive fitness for which they have evolved different impassioned-and potentially deadly-responses. These passions should be incorporated into manslaughter doctrine. For the law to apply fairly and mitigate for the frailty of human nature, it must take the actual design of the mind seriously. This Comment argues for a better understanding of human nature in manslaughter mitigation that will result in more just adjudications for both men and women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the legal defense of consent to harmful assaults under New Zealand law as of September 2012, focusing on the Great Britain House of Lords' decision in the 1994 Brown case which deals with the point at which the consent defense is no longer available in relation to criminal liability. Several legal cases involving the New Zealand Court of Appeal are examined, including the 2006 manslaughter case of Lee.

The article presents information on the jurisprudence of sadomasochism with respect to the assault law and the court case R v Brown. The issue sadomasochism includes other legal issues like manslaughter law, censorship law and discrimination law. Information on the recognition of the concept of sadomasochism through a polyvocal approach is also presented.

In this article, the author presents his views on the problems associated with political conversation. He discusses an analysis conducted by professor Gene Garver which reveals that political conversations do not have civility as people in this world need someone to blame for everything that happens in it. He states that Italian government has killed seismologists who were unable to predict an earthquake that killed over 300 people in the year 2009.

The article discusses multiple counts in prosecutions under Great Britain's Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (CMCHA) as of March 2012, focusing on the jury's assessment of the varying degrees of negligence, as well as information on statutory health and safety offences. Great Britain's Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HSWA) is also mentioned.

This article examines the reliance placed on expert evidence in prosecutions of health professionals for gross negligence manslaughter, where juries must decide whether conduct goes beyond civil negligence and constitutes the crime of involuntary manslaughter. It argues that the test for liability is vague and examines some of the consequences of this. Given the vagueness of the offence, jurors are likely to place great reliance on expert medical evidence. Little is known about how experts negotiate the legal process, empirically speaking: how they approach their task, how they view their role as expert witnesses, and the attitudes, biases, and beliefs that may underpin their testimony. Drawing on the experiences and perceptions often medical experts, this article explores how experts manage the vagueness inherent in the task of interpreting and applying gross negligence. Experts appear to go beyond offering purely medical opinion and enjoy engaging with law and the legal process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The controversial partial defence of provocation has now been abolished in three Australian jurisdictions, including Victoria. Recent developments in Victorian case law would appear to suggest a continuation of 'excuses' for male anger and violence towards women that position the woman victim as to blame for her own death. This article considers that the 2005 abolition of provocation was only in part designed to redress the problem of victim-blame. The decision was accompanied by other key changes introduced into the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) to make it easier for women who kill in the context of family violence to successfully claim self-defence and 'excessive self-defence' (defensive homicide). Drawing on recent developments in Victorian case law since the 2005 amendments, this article argues that the claim that provocation's victim-blaming narratives are being mobilised in the guise of other defences merits closer analysis. It also argues that provocation's critics must continue to expose the gendered (and raced) assumptions underlying the other defences to homicide, such as self-defence including manslaughter and the new offence of defensive homicide. Otherwise there is a risk that provocation's victim-blaming narratives could end up rewritten in such a way that support an argument for a reduction in culpability in cases where there is a history of violence against the woman victim, which is likely to result in claims that little has changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 establishes the statutory offence of corporate manslaughter, replacing the previous common law corporate liability for manslaughter. Health-care providers are potentially liable. This includes, but is not restricted to, National Health Service bodies. This paper considers the hypothetical liability of the various bodies involved in a well-known case of death arising from medical error, had the Act been in force when it occurred. The discussion illustrates the likelihood of difficulty in establishing liability. This difficulty arises not only from the requirements of the Act but also the involvement of several different bodies in the facts and circumstances of the fatal mistake. There are implications for a National Health Service whose future is likely to include greater fragmentation of service provision, with a greater number of corporate providers. Successful prosecutions for corporate manslaughter are expected to remain rare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]