A. Manslaughter Case Study 1

A group of people went to visit a pub. During the evening, there was a disagreement between members

of the group and there was some fighting and scuffling. The victim, a doorman at the pub, intervened to try to stop the fight. The pub manager asked the group to leave. They went down to their 4 x 4 vehicle in the car park. The accused got into the driving seat and three other people from the group got into the passenger seats. The victim stood in front of the car and the accused edged the car up to him and then stopped. The victim then started arguing with one of the passengers and put his head through the car window to grab him. The car was driven off with the victim halfway through the car window. As the car sped up the road, the victim's feet got caught in the front wheel and he fell on the road. He was run over and suffered severe chest injuries. He was pronounced dead two hours later.

Look at text B about the case in text A. Complete the other rows of Table 1.

1 Which charge is most likely in this case?

2 What is the likely verdict?

Read the title of essay 3 again.

1 Study a plan of this essay (Resource 10D).

2 Feed back on your research after Lesson 2.

3 Write some notes for paragraph 3.

4 What is the key element in evaluation of solutions in paragraph 4?

5 Complete the essay plan.

B It is clear that, in this case, the accused could face a murder charge, if the intention to kill could be proved. Alternatively, a charge of voluntary manslaughter could be brought if there was intent but mitigating circumstances. Finally, the prosecution could seek involuntary manslaughter by reason of unlawful or dangerous act, gross negligence or recklessness. It is equally clear that there are possible defences against each. Firstly, it is difficult, in this case, to prove intention to kill. Secondly, the act of driving away cannot be held to be unlawful in itself, but, clearly, it could be seen as dangerous, grossly negligent or reckless under the circumstances. However, even if the driver was negligent or reckless, there may well be evidence to support defences of self-defence, duress and necessity. The judgment given by Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest in R v Palmer [1971] AC 814, HL is quoted both in Archbold (1999) para. 19-41 and in Smith and Hogan (2002) p. 263. 'If there has been an attack so that defence is reasonably necessary, it will be recognised

that the person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of the defensive action