Capacity Defences Flashcards
What does the case of MNaghten 1843 say about insanity
D needs to be suffering from a defect of reason
Which is the result of a disease of the mind
Which cause d to not know nature or quality of act
What is defect of reason defined as
More than absent mindedness or confusion Clarke 1972
What is disease of the mind defined as
Can be physical as long as it affects the mind Kemp 1956
Source of disease irrelevant as long as affects mind Sullivan 1984
Needs to be internal ie not taking insulin Hennessy 1989
can’t be an external factor like not eating enough food Quick 1973
Can be sleepwalking Burgess 1991
Can you be voluntarily intoxicated which causes the insanity and use the defence of insanity
No as intoxication is an external factor Coley 2013
What is ‘not knowing the nature and quality of the act’ defined as
Not knowing what their doing because either in a state of impaired consciousness Oye 2013
or doesn’t understand legally wrong due to mental condition. If does know morally and legally wrong then guilty Windle 1952
What is the special verdict in insanity
Found not guilty by reason of insanity, judge can impose a hospital order, supervision order or absolute discharge. Options expanded from just a hospital stay by Criminal procedure (Insanity and unfitness to plead) act 1991
What is automatism defined as
An act done by the muscles without any control of the mind such as a spasm, reflex action or a convulsion, or an act by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing (Bratty 1963)
In what case was it decided that there is no fault for the defendant if in an automatic state by an external cause
Hill 1958
Can stress be an external factor leading to automatism
Yea R v T 1990
How much control has to be lost for automatism
All of it Attorney gens ref no.2 1992 1993
What is self induced automatism and what class of defences is it allowed
Knows conduct like to bring about automatic state. If reckless offence then can’t use as drinking was reckless course of action so guilty. Specific can be used Bailey 1983
What type of offences can intoxication as a defence be used for
Specific only as getting drunk is a reckless course of action Majewski 1977
If voluntary intoxication then can reckless offence use defence
No as drunk intent still intent Sheehan and Moore 1975
What will the prosecution sometimes do to secure a conviction when intoxication is involved
Charge with a specific and basic intent offence to get them on one Lipman 1970
If men’s rea present prior to intoxication then ??
Then guilty even if specific intent offence Gallagher 1963
What can a defendant argue when it comes to involuntary intoxication
Can argue didn’t form MR regardless of specific or basic but if prosecution can prove they did then guilty regardless even if wouldn’t have been committed if not taken involuntary intoxicating substance Kingston 1994
What is an intoxicated mistake
If d mistaken about key fact then a defence if specific intent. But if mistaken about level of self defence for example then no defence O’Grady 1987
What does the criminal justice and immigration act 2008 say about mistaken belief in voluntary intoxication
That if caused by vol intoxication then can’t give defence of self defence. S 76 days that reasonable force may be used for self defence but (5) says that it doesn’t brake D to rely on any mistaken belief attributable to intoxication that may be voluntary induced
What exception is there to intoxicated mistake
Jaggard 1980, court needed to consider actual state of belief, ie belief consent to destroy property in crim damage then defence
