Crime XXXXXII – Constructive Manslaughter XI – The Unlawful Act X
When
the defendant argues or claims that the unlawful act was the result of a
mistaken belief, in order to assess the dangerousness of the act or the extent
of the unlawfulness, the courts will apply the objective test or take into
account the perceptions of the reasonable man. Would a reasonable man have
perceived the act to be dangerous?
In
R v Ball (1989) the victim parked her car on the defendant’s land. The
defendant and the victim then got into an argument and the victim drove off in
her car. She returned later with two men and the defendant went off and came
back with a shotgun. He pointed the gun at the victim and pulled the trigger
and the victim died as a result.
The
defendant argued that he did not intent to kill the victim and that he merely
intended to scare her away and honestly believed that the gun was loaded with
blanks at the time he pulled the trigger. The defendant was tried and convicted
for constructive manslaughter.
The
defense appealed. According to the defense the dangerousness of the act or the
extent of the unlawfulness should be assessed in accordance with the perceptions
of the defendant and not in accordance with that of the reasonable men (as the
trial judge had directed).
The
appeal was dismissed. It was held that that the dangerousness of the act or the
extent of the unlawfulness should be judged in accordance with the perceptions
of the reasonable man and not that of the defendant i.e. in order to determine
the level of dangerousness or the extent of the unlawfulness the test that
should be applied is the objective test and not the subjective test (the
subjective test looks into the defendant’s state of mind at the time he
committed the act).
If
we were to use the subjective test or look into the defendant’s state of mind
we won’t be able to set any determinants because perceptions will differ from
person to person and often depends on the situation. In order to gauge the
dangerousness of the act or the extent of the unlawfulness it is best to use
the objective test.
In
order to scare the victim all the defendant had to do was to point the gun and
there was no need to pull the trigger. Pulling the trigger after pointing the
gun clearly tells us that the defendant was prepared to go one step further in
his attempt to scare the victim.
Copyright
© 2019 by Dyarne Ward
Comments
Post a Comment