Automatism Flashcards
What is automatism?
A general defence available to all offences. It is a complete defence, meaning if successful, D is completely acquitted.
How did Lord Denning define automatism?
“An act done by the muscles without any control of the mind such as spasm, reflex action or convulsion, or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing.”
Is automatism caused by internal or external factors?
External factors — it is known as non-insane automatism.
What are the two elements D must prove for automatism?
- D was acting entirely involuntarily
- The involuntary act was caused by an external factor
What is the authority for total involuntariness?
Attorney General’s Reference (No.2 of 1992) — D claimed he was driving in a trance-like state. CA ruled automatism requires total destruction of voluntary control; partial loss is insufficient.
What is an example where the automatism defence failed?
Broome v Perkins — D had some conscious control while driving (e.g. steering around obstacles), so automatism was not allowed.
Why is the external factor important in automatism?
It distinguishes automatism from insanity (internal factor).
What are examples of external factors causing automatism?
• Blow to the head (e.g., car crash)
• Swarm of bees (Hill v Baxter)
• Struck by stone (Hill v Baxter)
• Heart attack while driving (Hill v Baxter)
• Extreme stress (R v T – exceptional circumstances)
What case established insulin as an external factor?
Quick — Diabetic took insulin but failed to eat, entered hypoglycaemic state. External cause = insulin.
What is self-induced automatism?
When D causes their automatic state themselves, e.g., by taking medication incorrectly.
What if the external factor is alcohol or a dangerous drug?
The appropriate defence is intoxication, not automatism.
What are the rules for self-induced automatism if D knew actions were likely to cause it?
• Specific intent offence: Partial defence may be available (lack of mens rea).
• Basic intent offence: No defence — D seen as reckless.
What are the rules for self-induced automatism if D didn’t know actions were likely to cause it?
Complete defence available to both specific and basic intent offences because D was not reckless.
What is the key case on self-induced automatism involving Valium?
Hardie: D took Valium to calm down, but had an unexpected adverse reaction. Court allowed automatism as a defence because he wasn’t reckless — he didn’t anticipate the outcome.
What is the key case on self-induced automatism involving mens rea?
Bailey: Self-induced automatism may be a defence for specific intent offences (where mens rea must be proved), but not basic intent offences where recklessness is enough.
