R v Lidar [1999]

1. Facts:

• Defendant: D

• Incident: D drove off while V was still partially in the car, with V's head protruding out.

• Result: V’s head was crushed by the rear wheel of the car.

2. Outcome:

• Verdict: Convicted of reckless manslaughter.

• Reasoning: The court found that D’s driving, in the context of V's head being in a dangerous position, constituted recklessness that led to V’s death. D’s actions were deemed to show a disregard for the obvious risk of harm.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Recklessness in Manslaughter:

◦ Application: The case illustrates that reckless manslaughter can be based on a defendant’s recklessness concerning a known or obvious risk, even if the risk was not specifically directed towards the victim.

◦ Legal Standard: The court applied the test for recklessness, focusing on whether D's conduct showed a gross deviation from a reasonable standard of care that created a significant risk of death.

• Legal Implications:

◦ Recklessness Defined: The case reaffirms that recklessness involves awareness of a substantial risk and a disregard for that risk, leading to criminal liability for manslaughter if it results in death.