15.08.2013 Views

lc290 Partial Defences to Murder report - Law Commission

lc290 Partial Defences to Murder report - Law Commission

lc290 Partial Defences to Murder report - Law Commission

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2.56 The <strong>Law</strong> <strong>Commission</strong>, in the Draft Criminal Code of 1989, 64 defined murder in<br />

clause 54(1) as follows:<br />

A person is guilty of murder if he causes the death of another – (a)<br />

intending <strong>to</strong> cause death; or (b) intending <strong>to</strong> cause serious personal<br />

harm and being aware that he may cause death, unless sections 56,<br />

58, 59, 62 or 64 applies. 65<br />

2.57 It defined “intention” for the purposes of the Code in clause 18(b) in the following<br />

terms: “A person acts ‘intentionally’ with respect <strong>to</strong> … a result when he acts either<br />

in order <strong>to</strong> bring it about or being aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of<br />

events.”<br />

2.58 We have already referred <strong>to</strong> the Nathan Committee Report. 66 They concluded<br />

that the offence of murder should be defined by statute and that the basis should<br />

be the recommendations of the <strong>Law</strong> <strong>Commission</strong> in the Draft Criminal Code, both<br />

in terms of the definition of murder and in the definition of intention. That <strong>report</strong><br />

was the subject of a lengthy debate 67 in the House of Lords at the end of which<br />

the House “<strong>to</strong>ok note” of it. The record of that debate is, in its own right, a rich<br />

source of wisdom and of a range of views both on the definition of the offence of<br />

murder and on the case for and against the manda<strong>to</strong>ry life sentence for murder.<br />

THE IMPACT OF THE MANDATORY SENTENCE<br />

The difference between a murder and a manslaughter conviction<br />

2.59 Throughout the responses <strong>to</strong> Consultation Paper No 173 there was a single,<br />

prominent and endless refrain: the partial defences of provocation and diminished<br />

responsibility have as their origin and main purpose the protection of the<br />

defendant from the manda<strong>to</strong>ry death/life sentence for murder. The huge<br />

discrepancy in sentence for a person who succeeds, or fails, in those defences<br />

has generated pressures <strong>to</strong> expand those defences.<br />

2.60 Even before the passage in<strong>to</strong> law of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (“the 2003<br />

Act”), the discrepancy in the sentence a person would expect <strong>to</strong> receive<br />

depending on whether they fell one or other side of the line was massive.<br />

2.61 A life sentence for murder comprises three elements. The first element is a<br />

minimum term during which the convicted murderer must be detained for the<br />

purposes of retribution without any prospect of release. The second, which starts<br />

on the expiry of the first, runs until the parole board decides that the person<br />

safely may be released on licence. The third period runs for the remainder of the<br />

convicted person’s life. During that period the convicted person may be recalled<br />

<strong>to</strong> prison by administrative act and will be detained there until a decision is taken<br />

64 A Criminal Code for England and Wales (1989) <strong>Law</strong> Com No 177, vol 1.<br />

65 These sections set out the partial defences contained in the code of diminished<br />

responsibility, provocation, use of excessive force, suicide pact killing and infanticide.<br />

66 Report of the Select Committee on <strong>Murder</strong> and Life Imprisonment (1988-9) HL 78-I.<br />

67 Hansard (HL) 6 November 1989, vol 512, cols 448-530.<br />

26

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!