Constructive Manslaughter ESSAY PLAN

Question 1

Issues with Constructive Manslaughter

Answer 1

• Ashworth + Herring unfair labelling sentencing principle
• Moralism - Function of criminal law is establishing and enforcing societal norms and values

Mitchell - What about the case of ‘one punch killer’? There should be a foreseeable risk of death when there is an advertent criminal act

- Subjective - Dawson + Watson -> What the defendant thought was right

Overcriminalisation Ashworth

Someone may have only intended minor harm yet get punished severely

Question 2

For the Constructive Manslaughter Principle

Answer 2

Horder

If you intentionally harm someone’s body (e.g., hitting, kicking, or punching them), you are violating a fundamental moral and legal boundary

So even if you didn’t mean to kill them, the act of deliberately inflicting physical harm makes you morally tied to the outcome—including death if it occurs.

Gardner - Moral Threshold Argument

Intention to cause serious harm crosses a morla threshold, at which D is responsible for his own bad luck

Retributive theory - punishment for act should be porportional to harm caused to society

Bentham - Sanctity of life

Question 3

Criticism for justification of constructive manslaughter

Answer 3

• This violates the correspondance principle - The correspondence principle says that the harm caused should match the mental state (mens rea) of the offender
• Especially considering the condemnation and moral stigma that accompanies a conviction
• Problem with moral threshold argument is that YES you are liable but are you liable enough to be convicted of something way larger