Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
In struggling to define the boundaries of involuntary manslaughter the courts have encountered considerable difficulties and the resulting muddle is not a credit to the English Law - discussed
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Tue Aug 12 2003
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
"In struggling to define the boundaries of involuntary manslaughter the courts have encountered considerable difficulties and the resulting muddle is not a credit to the English Law" Discuss whether this criticism is justified. Involuntary manslaughter contains too many areas for conviction. I am not arguing with the law having different areas for different types of involuntary manslaughter but at they need to be defined and there is too much variation for conviction of the same offence. The areas of involuntary manslaughter are Recklessness, Gross Negligence and Constructive. If these were separate then they may work better but there are many overlaps. In Recklessness there is a subjective test (Cunningham) and an objective test (Caldwell). The Cunningham Test: a) Did the defendant foresee the possibility of the consequence occurring, and b) Was it unreasonable to take the risk. The Caldwell Test: a) Did the defendant create and obvious and serious risk? And b) i) Gives no thought to the possibility...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 146,186 others
Receive email updates for this category
- Simply tell us your email address and receive a weekly Study Help Email for FREE
- Receive 3 FREE essay views with each email
- Get all the latest essays from Coursework.Info & discussion from TheStudentRoom.co.uk
