- Published on
Legal Terms – Diminished Responsibility
An abnormality of mental functioning that does not qualify as *insanity (R v Seers [1984] 79 Cr App 261 CA) but serves as a partial defense to a murder charge. The phrase "abnormality of mental functioning" has replaced "abnormality of mind" in the previous legislation under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. The abnormality must also have resulted from a recognized medical condition (R v Dowds [2012] EWCA Crim 281 (CA), [2012] 1 Cr App R 455). The abnormality of mental functioning must substantially impair the defendant's ability to: (i) comprehend the nature of his conduct; (ii) form a rational judgment; and (iii) exercise self-control in order to function as a defense. It has been liberally interpreted to encompass conditions such as depression or *irresistible impulse (R v Vinagre (1979) 69 Cr App R 104). The defendant is found guilty of voluntary manslaughter if the defense is established.
An abnormality of mental functioning that does not qualify as *insanity (R v Seers [1984] 79 Cr App 261 CA) but serves as a partial defense to a murder charge. The phrase "abnormality of mental functioning" has replaced "abnormality of mind" in the previous legislation under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. The abnormality must also have resulted from a recognized medical condition (R v Dowds [2012] EWCA Crim 281 (CA), [2012] 1 Cr App R 455). The abnormality of mental functioning must substantially impair the defendant's ability to: (i) comprehend the nature of his conduct; (ii) form a rational judgment; and (iii) exercise self-control in order to function as a defense. It has been liberally interpreted to encompass conditions such as depression or *irresistible impulse (R v Vinagre (1979) 69 Cr App R 104). The defendant is found guilty of voluntary manslaughter if the defense is established.
0 Comments