- Published on
Kembaraxtra- Case Law-Ball (1989) - Constructive Act Manslaughter
Case Citation: R v Ball [1989] Crim LR 730
Key Issue: Objective assessment of "dangerousness" in constructive act manslaughter. Specifically, can the defendant's mistaken belief about the nature of their actions be considered when determining if the unlawful act was dangerous?
Facts:
Understand the objective nature of the "dangerousness" test in constructive act manslaughter. The reasonable person is not given the defendant's mistaken beliefs or knowledge.
Case Citation: R v Ball [1989] Crim LR 730
Key Issue: Objective assessment of "dangerousness" in constructive act manslaughter. Specifically, can the defendant's mistaken belief about the nature of their actions be considered when determining if the unlawful act was dangerous?
Facts:
- Defendant (D) loaded a gun with live and blank cartridges.
- D claimed he intended only to frighten the Victim (V) with a blank.
- The gun fired a live round, killing V.
- Was D guilty of unlawful act manslaughter, despite his mistaken belief that he was using a blank cartridge?
- D was found guilty of unlawful act manslaughter.
- The court held that the test for whether an act is "dangerous" is an objective one. The reasonable person CANNOT be endowed with the Defendant's subjective, mistaken belief.
- Stuart-Smith LJ's Key Statement: Once it is established the act was unlawful and that he intended to commit the assault, the question of dangerousness is assessed from the perspective of a "sober and reasonable man." The reasonable man's appreciation of the risk cannot be influenced by the Defendant's mistaken belief.
- The Defendant's intention, foresight, or knowledge is deemed irrelevant at the stage of assessing dangerousness.
- The unlawful act (assault) consisted of a dangerous act which caused death.
- The "dangerousness" of the assault is not dependent on the mens rea of the Defendant.
- In constructive act manslaughter, the "dangerousness" of the unlawful act is assessed objectively from the perspective of a reasonable person without imputing the defendant's mistaken beliefs about the situation.
- The defendant's subjective mens rea is irrelevant when considering dangerousness.
- Reinforces the objective standard for assessing "dangerousness" in unlawful act manslaughter.
- Clarifies that a defendant's mistaken belief about the nature of their actions does not negate the dangerousness of the act, as assessed by a reasonable person.
- This case highlights the tension between objective and subjective standards in criminal law.
Understand the objective nature of the "dangerousness" test in constructive act manslaughter. The reasonable person is not given the defendant's mistaken beliefs or knowledge.
0 Comments