The Experts below are selected from a list of 4860 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Clare Dyer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
medical Manslaughter police should consult super experts when considering prosecuting doctors review advises
BMJ, 2019Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:A cadre of super-experts to help police forces considering prosecuting doctors for gross negligence Manslaughter has been recommended by an independent review commissioned by the General Medical Council.1 The review of medical Manslaughter follows widespread unease over recent cases, including those of the trainee paediatrician Hadiza Bawa-Garba and the consultant surgeon David Sellu, in which individual doctors seemed to carry the can for systemic failures. The UK-wide review, chaired by a consultant cardiac surgeon, Leslie Hamilton, also concurs with the Williams review of gross negligence Manslaughter commissioned by the UK government, which recommended last year that the GMC should lose its …
-
law on gross negligence Manslaughter is flawed says leading medical lawyer
BMJ, 2018Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The law on gross negligence Manslaughter (GNM) is flawed because, unlike other areas of law, it asks a jury to decide what is or is not a criminal offence, the leading medical lawyer Robert Francis told members of parliament. Francis, who chaired the inquiry into poor care at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, was giving evidence to the Commons Health and Social Care Committee, which is looking at the law on GNM in the wake of the case of the trainee paediatrician Hadiza Bawa-Garba. She was convicted of Manslaughter after the death of six year old Jack Adcock from sepsis. A medical practitioners’ tribunal suspended her from the medical register for 12 months, but the General Medical Council appealed to the …
-
Sentences for serious Manslaughter in healthcare should start at 12 years, report recommends
BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2017Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:Sentences for gross negligence Manslaughter could increase after the Sentencing Council for England and Wales concluded that prison terms imposed by judges were too short in some cases. The council, an independent, non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, is consulting on plans to issue comprehensive sentencing guidelines on Manslaughter, in a consultation that closes on 10 October.1 Of the four types of Manslaughter, the council has specified …
-
Court overturns optometrist's conviction for gross negligence Manslaughter.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2017Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:The Court of Appeal has quashed an optometrist’s conviction for gross negligence Manslaughter, in a judgment that clarifies the law and could help reduce the number of such cases brought against doctors. The court confirmed that, for a gross negligence Manslaughter prosecution to succeed, an obvious and serious risk of death must have been foreseeable at the time the breach of duty occurred. The optometrist, Honey Rose, performed a routine eye examination on an 8 year old boy, Vincent Barker, but failed to properly examine the back of his eyes, which would have disclosed swollen optic discs. He died five months later from acute …
-
Paediatrician is denied permission to appeal against Manslaughter conviction.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2016Co-Authors: Clare DyerAbstract:A paediatrician who was convicted of Manslaughter after a 6 year old patient died of septic shock has failed to persuade three senior judges to give her permission to appeal against her conviction.1 Hadiza Bawa-Garba, who was a specialist registrar in paediatrics at Leicester Royal Infirmary, was found guilty of Manslaughter in November 2015 over the death of Jack Adcock, who had Down’s syndrome. …
Aaron Taylor - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
An Analysis of the Effects of Subjective and Objective Instruction Forms on Mock-Juries' Murder/Manslaughter Distinctions
Law and Human Behavior, 2002Co-Authors: Matthew P. Spackman, Jann C. Belcher, Justin W. Calapp, Aaron TaylorAbstract:Defendants' emotions at the time of their crimes may potentially serve as mitigating circumstances in murder/Manslaughter cases. The present study examined whether differences between two forms of instructions given juries in such cases affected mock-juries' murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Jurors' reasons for their verdicts and definitions of murder and Manslaughter were also compared. In addition, three factors found to be predictive of murder/Manslaughter distinctions in previous research were evaluated. It was found that, though instruction forms affected jurors' stated reasons for their verdicts and their definitions of murder and Manslaughter, they did not significantly affect murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Defendants were most likely to be convicted of murder if they had a history of violence with the victim and dwelt upon their emotions. We suggest jurors likely construe instructions given them to fit their a priori understandings of murder, Manslaughter, and the potentially mitigating role of defendants' emotions.
Matthew P. Spackman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of Perceived Emotional Intensity on Mock Jurors Murder/Manslaughter Distinctions
Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 2007Co-Authors: Matthew P. Spackman, Jann C. Belcher, Ashley S. HansenAbstract:Anglo-American law instructs jurors that defendants' emotions might constitute mitigating circumstances in murder/Manslaughter cases. The present study examined which aspects of defendants' emotions mock jurors take into consideration when determining their murder/Manslaughter verdicts. Four factors found to be predictive of perceptions of emotional intensity in previous research were shown to be predictive of murder/Manslaughter convictions. These factors included whether the defendant had a history of violence with the victim, the particular emotion experienced, whether the defendant dwelt upon the feelings associated with his or her emotion, and whether the defendant intended the actions associated with his or her emotion. These findings are compared with two approaches that the law has taken to evaluate defendants' emotions: objective standards and subjective standards. Ramifications of these findings for jury instructions as well as for the law's conception of emotion are discussed.
-
An Analysis of the Effects of Subjective and Objective Instruction Forms on Mock-Juries' Murder/Manslaughter Distinctions
Law and Human Behavior, 2002Co-Authors: Matthew P. Spackman, Jann C. Belcher, Justin W. Calapp, Aaron TaylorAbstract:Defendants' emotions at the time of their crimes may potentially serve as mitigating circumstances in murder/Manslaughter cases. The present study examined whether differences between two forms of instructions given juries in such cases affected mock-juries' murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Jurors' reasons for their verdicts and definitions of murder and Manslaughter were also compared. In addition, three factors found to be predictive of murder/Manslaughter distinctions in previous research were evaluated. It was found that, though instruction forms affected jurors' stated reasons for their verdicts and their definitions of murder and Manslaughter, they did not significantly affect murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Defendants were most likely to be convicted of murder if they had a history of violence with the victim and dwelt upon their emotions. We suggest jurors likely construe instructions given them to fit their a priori understandings of murder, Manslaughter, and the potentially mitigating role of defendants' emotions.
Jared Guemmer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Missouri Felony Murder Rule’s Merger Limitation: A Doctrine in Limbo
Missouri law review, 2015Co-Authors: Jared GuemmerAbstract:I. INTRODUCTION American criminal law is riddled with peculiarities that are decidedly "American" in nature. The United States plots its own course while other common law countries, like England, abolish certain forms of criminal liability (1) and punishments, (2) or establish mandatory protocols for criminal interrogations. (3) Among the most prominent of America's legal eccentricities is its continued use of the felony murder rule. It casts a broad shadow over America's criminal justice system by drastically increasing the punishment for criminal activity that is often less culpable than other offenses not prosecuted under the felony murder rule. (4) Many see it as a form of strict liability when a death results in the course of one's felonious activities. (5) Historically, the felony murder rule was unnecessary under common law felonies because all felonies were punishable by death. (6) As justice systems migrated away from that blanket form of punishment, it was important to recognize when a killing was a murder, and thus punishable through the harshest means available under the law. (7) The felony murder rule developed as a means to effectively punish those who caused another's death during the course of a felonious action. (8) The rationale was that those who caused a death while committing a felony should face greater punishment for their wrongful conduct than those who commit felonies without causing a death. (9) This new rule presented a problem. One who kills another person under the influence of a sudden heat of passion commits a felony: Manslaughter. (10) Thus, the wrongdoer caused a death while committing a felony. (11) Therefore, felony murder must apply. (12) Under this interpretation, felony murder risks obliterating the crime of Manslaughter because all Manslaughter becomes punishable as felony murder. (13) As a result, the felony murder rule had to be limited in some manner. (14) The courts rapidly recognized the flaw and made it clear that such an absurd result could not stand: the crime of Manslaughter would "merge" with the killing. (15) For the same reasons, a lesser degree of murder could not serve as the felony upon which a charge of felony murder was predicated. (16) Thus, the merger limitation of the felony murder rule was born, but felony murder continued to have a broad hold on punishments for killings other than murder. Imagine a circumstance where a man finds his wife in bed with another man. Distraught, and unable to think clearly, he grabs a heavy object from the dresser and bludgeons both of them to death in the heat of passion. Every first-year law student recognizes this as Manslaughter. (17) But, what if the prosecutor chooses to not charge it as Manslaughter? (18) What if, instead, the prosecutor charges the defendant with a non-killing felony, such as assault with a deadly weapon? (19) Now, a killing occurred during the course of a felony other than Manslaughter--the underlying felony is the assault, not the killing itself. (20) Can the defendant who committed a textbook Manslaughter instead be charged with murder via the felony murder rule? In the vast majority of states, the answer is, "No." (21) Most states, almost since the emergence of the felony murder rule, have limited by statute what felonies may serve as predicate--or underlying--felonies. (21) Some states limit the application of felony murder to those felonies inherently "dangerous to life," or they limit them to an enumerated list of felonies. (23) In many states, the merger doctrine applies to "assaultive" felonies and prevents application of the felony murder rule to killings that occur in the course of an assaultive felony. (24) The merger doctrine requires the actor have an independent, felonious purpose, other than causing bodily harm or death to the victim. (25) Unfortunately, recent case law in Missouri obliterated the merger doctrine. (26) This Note aims to expose the faulty reasoning applied by Missouri courts in abrogating the merger doctrine. …
-
the missouri felony murder rule s merger limitation a doctrine in limbo
Missouri law review, 2015Co-Authors: Jared GuemmerAbstract:I. INTRODUCTION American criminal law is riddled with peculiarities that are decidedly "American" in nature. The United States plots its own course while other common law countries, like England, abolish certain forms of criminal liability (1) and punishments, (2) or establish mandatory protocols for criminal interrogations. (3) Among the most prominent of America's legal eccentricities is its continued use of the felony murder rule. It casts a broad shadow over America's criminal justice system by drastically increasing the punishment for criminal activity that is often less culpable than other offenses not prosecuted under the felony murder rule. (4) Many see it as a form of strict liability when a death results in the course of one's felonious activities. (5) Historically, the felony murder rule was unnecessary under common law felonies because all felonies were punishable by death. (6) As justice systems migrated away from that blanket form of punishment, it was important to recognize when a killing was a murder, and thus punishable through the harshest means available under the law. (7) The felony murder rule developed as a means to effectively punish those who caused another's death during the course of a felonious action. (8) The rationale was that those who caused a death while committing a felony should face greater punishment for their wrongful conduct than those who commit felonies without causing a death. (9) This new rule presented a problem. One who kills another person under the influence of a sudden heat of passion commits a felony: Manslaughter. (10) Thus, the wrongdoer caused a death while committing a felony. (11) Therefore, felony murder must apply. (12) Under this interpretation, felony murder risks obliterating the crime of Manslaughter because all Manslaughter becomes punishable as felony murder. (13) As a result, the felony murder rule had to be limited in some manner. (14) The courts rapidly recognized the flaw and made it clear that such an absurd result could not stand: the crime of Manslaughter would "merge" with the killing. (15) For the same reasons, a lesser degree of murder could not serve as the felony upon which a charge of felony murder was predicated. (16) Thus, the merger limitation of the felony murder rule was born, but felony murder continued to have a broad hold on punishments for killings other than murder. Imagine a circumstance where a man finds his wife in bed with another man. Distraught, and unable to think clearly, he grabs a heavy object from the dresser and bludgeons both of them to death in the heat of passion. Every first-year law student recognizes this as Manslaughter. (17) But, what if the prosecutor chooses to not charge it as Manslaughter? (18) What if, instead, the prosecutor charges the defendant with a non-killing felony, such as assault with a deadly weapon? (19) Now, a killing occurred during the course of a felony other than Manslaughter--the underlying felony is the assault, not the killing itself. (20) Can the defendant who committed a textbook Manslaughter instead be charged with murder via the felony murder rule? In the vast majority of states, the answer is, "No." (21) Most states, almost since the emergence of the felony murder rule, have limited by statute what felonies may serve as predicate--or underlying--felonies. (21) Some states limit the application of felony murder to those felonies inherently "dangerous to life," or they limit them to an enumerated list of felonies. (23) In many states, the merger doctrine applies to "assaultive" felonies and prevents application of the felony murder rule to killings that occur in the course of an assaultive felony. (24) The merger doctrine requires the actor have an independent, felonious purpose, other than causing bodily harm or death to the victim. (25) Unfortunately, recent case law in Missouri obliterated the merger doctrine. (26) This Note aims to expose the faulty reasoning applied by Missouri courts in abrogating the merger doctrine. …
Jann C. Belcher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of Perceived Emotional Intensity on Mock Jurors Murder/Manslaughter Distinctions
Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 2007Co-Authors: Matthew P. Spackman, Jann C. Belcher, Ashley S. HansenAbstract:Anglo-American law instructs jurors that defendants' emotions might constitute mitigating circumstances in murder/Manslaughter cases. The present study examined which aspects of defendants' emotions mock jurors take into consideration when determining their murder/Manslaughter verdicts. Four factors found to be predictive of perceptions of emotional intensity in previous research were shown to be predictive of murder/Manslaughter convictions. These factors included whether the defendant had a history of violence with the victim, the particular emotion experienced, whether the defendant dwelt upon the feelings associated with his or her emotion, and whether the defendant intended the actions associated with his or her emotion. These findings are compared with two approaches that the law has taken to evaluate defendants' emotions: objective standards and subjective standards. Ramifications of these findings for jury instructions as well as for the law's conception of emotion are discussed.
-
An Analysis of the Effects of Subjective and Objective Instruction Forms on Mock-Juries' Murder/Manslaughter Distinctions
Law and Human Behavior, 2002Co-Authors: Matthew P. Spackman, Jann C. Belcher, Justin W. Calapp, Aaron TaylorAbstract:Defendants' emotions at the time of their crimes may potentially serve as mitigating circumstances in murder/Manslaughter cases. The present study examined whether differences between two forms of instructions given juries in such cases affected mock-juries' murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Jurors' reasons for their verdicts and definitions of murder and Manslaughter were also compared. In addition, three factors found to be predictive of murder/Manslaughter distinctions in previous research were evaluated. It was found that, though instruction forms affected jurors' stated reasons for their verdicts and their definitions of murder and Manslaughter, they did not significantly affect murder/Manslaughter distinctions. Defendants were most likely to be convicted of murder if they had a history of violence with the victim and dwelt upon their emotions. We suggest jurors likely construe instructions given them to fit their a priori understandings of murder, Manslaughter, and the potentially mitigating role of defendants' emotions.