Crime XXXVIII - Involuntary Manslaughter I
Involuntary
manslaughter occurs when death results from the overtly negligent or careless
act of the accused i.e. the accused kills another without the intention to kill
or lacks the mens rea for murder i.e. premeditation or intent and it normally
occurs when death results from an act that is callous and reckless.
In
R v Walker (1824) the accused was driving his horse drawn cart down a street
recklessly calling out to the pedestrians as he did so to get out of the way.
The cart ran over a passerby, who died as a result and the accused was arrested
and tried.
Because
the accused lacked the mens rea to kill, his act though careless and reckless
was not done with the intent to kill and therefore lacked the prerequisite for
murder. The accused was convicted of manslaughter instead.
Similarly,
in R v Martin (1827) where the accused had given a child a wrong drink or a
drink that was not suitable for the child, as a result of which, the child
died, the accused was convicted of manslaughter. Clearly the accused did not
intend to kill the child despite that being the end result of an extremely
careless act.
In
R v Rigmaidon (1833) the accused neglected to securely fasten a cask to the
back of a cart and the ropes that were holding the cask in place became undone
during the journey. The cask fell off the back of the cart and killed two women
and the accused was convicted of manslaughter.
Likewise,
in R v Mastin (1834) the accused was galloping down a street and his horse
crashed into the victim, who was seated on another horse, presumably his own,
and the resultant crash caused the victim his life. The accused was convicted
of manslaughter.
From
the cases that we have seen so far, it is fair to surmise that reckless
manslaughter occurs when the overtly careless act of the accused results in the
death of another. In all the above cases, the element of premeditation or the
intent to kill or bring about the death of another isn’t there as opposed to
when the accused walks down the street with a knife in his hand with the
intention to kill someone or the first person that he comes across see R v
Hendy (2006).
In
both instances, the victims are strangers i.e. someone the accused does not
know or is not related to or connected to the accused in any way. However, it
is not the intention of the accused to bring about death of another, despite
that being the consequence of his or her actions, in the former (R v Mastin
(1834)). In the latter (R v Hendy (2006)), the accused intends to bring about
the death of another regardless of who it is and the comparison clearly allows
us to distinguish between murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter.
A
negligent act done while the accused is drunk can also give rise to a
conviction of involuntary manslaughter provided that there was no intention to
kill or the prosecution cannot establish an intention to kill.
In
R v Walters (1834), both the accused and the victim were drunk. The accused was
standing on the deck of a ship and the victim was standing on a boat and the
accused and the victim had an argument. The accused kicked the boat with his
foot and as a result the victim lost his balance and fell into the water and
subsequently drowned. The defendant was convicted of manslaughter.
To
some extent it is also possible to say that reckless manslaughter, in the
absence of any other inherent reasons that caused the accused to act in the way
or manner that he or she did, is the result of an act that the accused could
have done without.
Driving
down the street for example is something that can be done with care and caution
and if one adopts the attitude of defensive driving i.e. not only driving with
care but driving while trying to anticipate the mistakes of other road users,
it would certainly reduce the number of convictions for reckless manslaughter.
In
R v Timmins (1836) we are once again confronted with a situation where death
has resulted from the reckless driving of the accused. The accused in the case
drove his carriage exceedingly fast, competing with another driver and as a
result he lost control of the carriage. The carriage overturned and an innocent
passenger was killed. The accused was convicted of manslaughter.
Copyright
© 2019 by Dyarne Ward
Comments
Post a Comment