Manslaughter: Diminished Responsibility
Date Produced: 24 February 2010
Title: Homicide
Offence: Manslaughter: Diminished Responsibility
Legislation: Offences Against the Person Act 1861 section 5
Mode of Trial: Indictable only
Statutory Limitations & Maximum Penalty: Life imprisonment
Sentencing Range: Serious specified violent offence. Schedule 15A CJA 2003 applies
Relevant Sentencing Guidelines
R v Chambers (1983) 5 Cr. App. R. (S.) 190 - guideline case.
In diminished responsibility cases there are various courses open to a judge. Choice of the right course will depend on the state of the evidence and the material before him.
- If the psychiatric reports recommend and justify it, and there are no contrary indications, he will make a hospital order.
- Where a hospital order is not recommended, or is not appropriate, and the defendant constitutes a danger to the public for an unpredictable period of time, the right sentence will, in all probability, be one of life imprisonment.
- In cases where the evidence indicates that the accused's responsibility for his acts was so grossly impaired that his degree of responsibility for them was minimal, then a lenient course will be open to the judge. Provided that there is no danger of repetition of violence, it will usually be possible to make such an order as will give the accused his freedom possibly with some supervision.
- There will however be cases in which there is no proper basis for a hospital order, that in which the accused's degree of responsibility is not minimal. In such cases the judge should pass a determinate sentence of imprisonment, the length of which will depend on two factors: his assessment of the degree of the accused's responsibility his view as to the period of time, if any, which the accused will continue to be danger to the public.
Chambers stabbed his wife to death whilst suffering from an anxiety-depressive state of considerable severity which substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. His condition was not such that a medical disposal was recommended. Aged 29 and of previous good character. The Court of Appeal shared the trial judgess view that he retained a very substantial amount of responsibility for his acts. Sentenced reduced to eight years imprisonment.
Relevant Sentencing Case Law
Recent Decisions reported in CSP at B 1-1.3A covering offenders subject to a mental condition not requiring treatment in hospital or justifying an indeterminate sentence.
Return to Sentencing Manual index
