Automatism (MC)

Question 1

What is automatism?

Answer 1

-Defence to criminal offence, act done by muscles without any control by the mind or by person
-not conscious of what they are doing

Question 2

What does automatism require the D to show that his act was?

Answer 2

-Involuntary
-Due to an external factor (not insanity if external factor)

Question 3

What type of defence?

Answer 3

-Complete defence and found not guilty

Question 4

Quote from Bratty v Attorney Gen for NI (Lord denning)

Answer 4

“No act punishable if done involuntary, act done by the muscles without any control by the mind such as a spasm a reflex action or convulsion or act done by person who is not conscious of what he is doing such as when suffering from concussion or sleepwalking”

Question 5

What are the two types of automatism?

Answer 5

-Insane: cause is internal, disease of the mind. M’Naghten rules. NGRI
-Non-insane: cause is external, defence succeeds then NG by automatism

Question 6

What are examples of external causes?

Answer 6

-Blow to head
-Attacked by needs
-Sneezing
-Hypnotism
-PTSD
-drugs

Question 7

Automatism: external cause

Answer 7

-Defence as AR done by D is not a voluntary one

Question 8

What are the 4 cases for external automatism

Answer 8

-Hill v Baxter
-R v T
-Quick (contrast to Hennessy)
-A-G’s ref no 2 1992

Question 9

Hill v Baxter

Answer 9

-D drove though stop sign w/o stopping and collided with car. Charged w dangerous driving, little evidence to support automatism.
-Sparked discussion and stated that person shouldn’t be made liable where through no fault of own becomes unconscious while driving

Question 10

R v T

Answer 10

-Stress in exceptional circumstances can cause automatism
-D suffered PTSD after being raped

Question 11

Quick

Answer 11

-Taken insulin
-Diabetic failed to eat after taking insulin, drank alcohol. Assaulted patient. External cause as effect was bc of drug and not insanity
-Hypoglycaemia caused by insulin, external factors, raised defence of automatism.
-In Hennessy had not taken insulin, him stealing car caused by diabetes which is internal.

Question 12

Will partial loss of control suffice for automatism?

Answer 12

-Has to be a total loss of control as set out in AG’s reference no 2 1992. Reduce or partial is not sufficient to amount to automatism

Question 13

What is the other type of automatism?

Answer 13

-Self-induced automatism
-AT may not be available if the AT caused by own fault
-eg use of drink or drugs causing to lose control or diabetic that knows their conduct likely lead to harm (Quick)
-Availability of defence depend on whether D knew the risk

Question 14

Cases for self-induced automatism

Answer 14

-R v Coley
-R v McGhee

Question 15

R v Coley

Answer 15

-D took cannabis and attacked neighbours, defence failed bc not acting wholly involuntarily and had induced condition by taking cannabis

Question 16

R v McGhee

Answer 16

-D suffered from tinnitus and took temazepam, drank alcohol.
-Even if he had been in state of AT defence would fail as he induced it through voluntarily taking temazepam

Question 17

If automatism that results from action that is appropriate action but has unexpected outcome then we need to distinguish:

Answer 17

-Specific intent: will be defence as cannot be in worse position than they would be if resulted in intoxication
-Basic intent: not defence as if knew risk that they did become an automaton they might engage in dangerous beh.

Question 18

Cases for unexpected outcome

Answer 18

Bailey
Hardie

Question 19

Bailey

Answer 19

-Diabetic didn’t eat enough after taking insulin, charged w s18 OAPA (specific)
-Jury should consider automatism as defence t specific defence

Question 20

Hardie

Answer 20

-D took Valium tablets as depressed, set fire to wardrobe (basic intent)
-D not been reckless, jury should consider his defence of automatism