A 13-year-old boy and a 15-year-old boy are playing with a shotgun, which they both believe to be unloaded. The 13-year-old aims the gun at the 15-year-old. The 15-year-old laughs as he thinks this is funny. The 13-year-old then pulls the trigger, believing nothing will happen. The gun contains a bullet, which fires at the 15-year-old. The 15-year-old dies immediately.
Is the 13-year-old guilty of manslaughter?
A 13-year-old boy and a 15-year-old boy are playing with a shotgun, which they both believe to be unloaded. The 13-year-old aims the gun at the 15-year-old. The 15-year-old laughs as he thinks this is funny. The 13-year-old then pulls the trigger, believing nothing will happen. The gun contains a bullet, which fires at the 15-year-old. The 15-year-old dies immediately.
Is the 13-year-old guilty of manslaughter?
No, because he has not committed an unlawful act.
(E) The 13-year-old is not guilty of manslaughter. There is no intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm here, so voluntary manslaughter is not available. Likewise, there is no duty of care, so gross negligence manslaughter is unavailable. The only form of manslaughter that could apply here is unlawful act manslaughter ('UAM'). UAM requires an act that is intentional, unlawful, and dangerous that causes the death of the victim. To be 'unlawful', there must be an underlying criminal offence. Here, we have an act that is intentional and dangerous that causes the death of the victim, but it is not unlawful. There is no assault, as the victim also does not believe the gun to be loaded, so there is no apprehension of the application of force.
(A), (B) and (C) are incorrect as negligence, recklessness, and the reasonable person's behaviour are irrelevant.
(D) is incorrect as there has not been an unlawful act.