Talk:Manslaughter in English law

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Mid‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mens rea[edit]

Don't really see what the stuff about 'subjectivist theory of choice' is doing here in such a prominent position. Suggest putting it somewhere else, perhaps with a quod vide.

I came to this article trying to understand 'causing death by dangerous driving', which I thought had a lower mens rea requirement than manslaughter. But I think there is some element of mens rea built into the idea of 'cause'. Can anyone enlighten me about this?

publunch ( --87.113.78.101 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC) )[reply]

Actus reus[edit]

I believe that the four part actus reus for gross negligence manslaughter stated as coming from R v Bateman, in fact derives from R v Adomako. 86.152.89.87 (talk) 00:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which came directly from Bateman,

In cases of manslaughter by criminal negligence involving a breach of duty, it is a sufficient direction to the jury to adopt the gross negligence test set out by the Court of Appeal in the present case following R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 and Andrews v DPP [1937] 2 All ER 552, [1937] AC 576 ...

. I agree that Adomako restated the "Bateman test", and perhaps should be cited as a more recent authority, particularly since it overruled cases such as Stephens, and the article should be updated. Rodhull andemu 00:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right, it does originate from Bateman. The wording used here does stem from Adomako. 86.152.89.87 (talk) 01:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be a good idea to say something like "as originally set forth in Bateman and recently approved in Adomako. That way we cover the original tests for gross negligence in manslaughter, yet emphasise that it's still regarded as good law. Rodhull andemu 01:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chance medley[edit]

Archold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice appears to list chance medley as a distinct defence. Someone should check that this is in fact the case as I have not yet read R v Semini.James500 (talk) 07:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From English criminal law[edit]

In the interests of avoiding co tracts I have cut the following from English criminal law. I will check that it does not say anything that is not in the article and then delete it.James500 (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Involuntary manslaughter refers to death unlawfully caused. This means that some unlawful act is done and the final consequence, if not too remote, is another person's death. The requisite mens rea is usually recklessness. The concept of gross negligence manslaughter exists in England and Wales meaning that a person can be guilty and criminally liable without ever having subjectively foreseen that outcome.

'Lesser included offence' - is that a thing in English Law ?[edit]

(see lesser included offence)

takes us to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesser_included_offense

Which mentions US, Canada and Ireland.

Oh, it says "(in English law, this is termed an alternative verdict)."

I'll try to edit the link text, to be consistent in terminology.

Seems OK - perhaps alternative verdict would be better as a separate holding page for English Law, with a redirect? Beyond me technically.

Ha! It already existed. I'll link from the Eng. term, instead of offence->offence ! 2A00:23C8:660A:5A01:E19B:17FD:267A:2C0C (talk) 19:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]