- Page 1:
ReportHomicide: murderand involunta
- Page 4 and 5:
Law Reform CommissionTHE LAW REFORM
- Page 6 and 7:
Law Reform CommissionLaw Reform Res
- Page 8 and 9:
Law Reform CommissionContact Detail
- Page 10 and 11:
viii
- Page 12 and 13:
CHAPTER 5F Issues relating to gross
- Page 15 and 16:
TABLE OF CASESAndrews v DPP [1937]
- Page 17 and 18:
INTRODUCTION1. This Report forms pa
- Page 19 and 20:
8. The Commission still holds most
- Page 21 and 22:
1CHAPTER 1THE MURDER/MANSLAUGHTERDI
- Page 23 and 24:
1.07 Fourth, if there were a single
- Page 25 and 26:
(b)Arguments favouring abolition of
- Page 27 and 28:
1.20 Professor Ivana Bacik also sup
- Page 29 and 30:
Bingham of Cornhill observed in a l
- Page 31 and 32:
“there can be nothing offensive i
- Page 33 and 34:
then Minister for Justice, Nora Owe
- Page 35 and 36:
degrees of seriousness in manslaugh
- Page 37 and 38:
against the decision, nor has the A
- Page 39 and 40:
people whom they represented than w
- Page 41 and 42:
2CHAPTER 2MURDER: THE CURRENT LAW A
- Page 43 and 44:
unsatisfactory. Murder is the most
- Page 45 and 46:
“To intend to murder, or to cause
- Page 47 and 48:
ecklessness involves foresight of t
- Page 49 and 50:
Court referred to the 41 st edition
- Page 51 and 52:
However, as the Court of Appeal sta
- Page 53 and 54:
2.40 In Hyam v DPP 45 the accused p
- Page 55 and 56:
2.48 Foresight must be of such a le
- Page 57 and 58:
DIssues relating to murder(1) Are t
- Page 59 and 60:
“the presence or absence of inten
- Page 61 and 62:
2.63 A number of reform bodies have
- Page 63 and 64:
• A defendant who intentionally i
- Page 65:
2.74 On the other hand, defining th
- Page 68 and 69:
unjustifiable risk that the materia
- Page 70 and 71:
• In South Africa, under the conc
- Page 72 and 73:
3.15 The Commission provisionally f
- Page 74 and 75:
(e)• Manslaughter or Negligent Ki
- Page 76 and 77:
3.30 Some consultees who believed t
- Page 78 and 79:
where (a) the offender killed with
- Page 80 and 81:
3.44 The Commission still believes
- Page 82 and 83:
injury to a person which is “suff
- Page 84 and 85:
3.58 An academic commentator agreed
- Page 86 and 87:
3.66 In paragraph 5.53 the Commissi
- Page 88 and 89: describe the risk. It was argued th
- Page 91 and 92: 4CHAPTER 4INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER:
- Page 93 and 94: 4.05 The Commission discussed the p
- Page 95 and 96: CUnlawful and dangerous act manslau
- Page 97 and 98: 4.20 Those who focus on the moral i
- Page 99 and 100: sixth 31 in order of gravity. Respo
- Page 101 and 102: 4.31 According to Hart, the adverb
- Page 103 and 104: 4.39 In The People (DPP) v Barden 4
- Page 105 and 106: isk, he ought to have exercised the
- Page 107 and 108: 4.53 The offence is committed where
- Page 109 and 110: 4.59 The Commission sought submissi
- Page 111 and 112: 5CHAPTER 5INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER:
- Page 113 and 114: lesser crime and receive a softer p
- Page 115 and 116: 5.12 In cases where the accused pun
- Page 117 and 118: in circumstances where it is accept
- Page 119 and 120: of “common knowledge” and life-
- Page 121 and 122: 5.40 The Commission does, however,
- Page 123 and 124: Kennedy, 35 R v Dias 36 and R v Rog
- Page 125 and 126: “negligent homicide” may be a f
- Page 127 and 128: negligence so as to produce a fluct
- Page 129 and 130: stole a vehicle and a high speed po
- Page 131 and 132: (b)(i)The relevance of death in car
- Page 133 and 134: 6CHAPTER 6SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
- Page 135: • that the negligence was of a ve
- Page 140 and 141: ___________________________________
- Page 142 and 143: Unlawful and dangerous act manslaug
- Page 144 and 145: www.lawreform.ie