Criminal law (case study) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Criminal law (case study) - Essay Example Actus reus of murder (and manslaughter) is the unlawful act that's done deliberately and is a significant cause of death of some person. If the court is able to prove that the defendant had intention to kill (that is, mens rea) then it is murder, not manslaughter. Running from home in panic, Joe pushed his brother who hurt himself when hit the ground. Later his brother went home and died at night from head trauma. Joe can be accused both of battery and manslaughter. Since there is an ambiguity about the term "touching" concerning battery (e.g., the Court of Appeal in Wilson v Pringle [1986] 2 All ER 440 stated that to prove battery "the touching must be proved to be a hostile touching"), we will analyze the third case later. Post-traumatic stress disorder is "an anxiety disorder in which a particularly stressful event, such as military combat, rape, or a natural disaster, brings in its aftermath intrusive mental images of experiencing a traumatic event, emotional numbness and detachment, estrangement from others2" etc. One of the common responses of people with PTSD is uncontrollable behaviour that can be expressed in fits of anger (Chemtob et al., 1997) towards other persons or even assault on them. According to Mental Health Act 1983, there are different kinds of PTSD patients' treatment, e.g., hospitalisation, guardianship, supervision and treatment. The story tells us nothing about it, but since it will be essential later, we assume two probable situations: there was no medical treatment and control of Joe's disorder; there was medical supervision and treatment, but Joe was considered harmless at that time as there were no more measures provided. Having had flashback caused by victim's actions, Joe had lost the sense of reality and behaved according to his traumatic experience. The victim screamed and it caused Joe to have an imaginary return in the traumatic situation and probably to treat the victim as an enemy soldier. Joe's mind has created a delusive situation in which ex-soldier believed that his actions are correct: such belief in moral and legal rightfulness is the first reason to plead diminished responsibility (see Bratty v AG for Northern Ireland (1963) AC 386 at 409). The second factor is total loss of control. Since there were cases when partial loss of control didn't make an acquittal (e.g., in Broome v Perkins (1987) Crim LR 271), the defendant must prove that he had no possibility to control his actions, for the burden of proof in the case of insanity lies with the defendant. Then we must prove that either insanity or automatism took place. The factor that triggered flashback was external that should prove automatism, but Joe's reactions were atypical because of his mental illness that is the inner factor. There is an opinion that "if the defendant loses control because of an illness, that is, some internal factor, he can only plead insanity" (Hill v Baxter (1958) 1 QB 277). But there is the external factor in our case, the victim's scream. We should point that Joe's reaction was atypical and unexpected, and also can refer to the case of R v Rabey (1997) (Canadian case), in which defendant battered his