ch 5/6 general defences to a crime Flashcards

1
Q

defences to a crime

A

a justification or lawful ‘reason’ given by an accused person as to why they are not guilty of a criminal offence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

self defence

A
  • believed that their actions were necessary
    to protect or defend themselves, and
  • perceived their actions to be a reasonable
    response in the circumstances.
  • once an accused raises self defence the prosecution must prove BRD that it wasnt self defence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

mental impairment

A

a condition of the mind that impacts on a persons ability to know the nature and quality of their conduct or that their conduct was wrong

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

areas of mental impairment

A
  • did not know what they were doing because they had little understanding of the nature and quality
    of their actions, and
  • did not know their conduct was wrong or could not reason, or think about, their conduct like
    an ordinary person.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is characteristic of mental impairment

A

an accused is presumed sane unless it can be proven otherwise. this means that the burden of proof in proving the existence of mental impairment falls on the party who raises it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what happens if mental impairment is successfully argued

A

there is a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental impairment- impose a secure treatment order that allows compulsory detainment to receive treatment at a mental health service

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

duress

A

strong mental pressure on someone to overcome their independent will
and force them to do something

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

an accused may use duress if there is reasonable belief that:

A
  • a threat of harm existed
  • the threat would have been carried out unless the offence was committed
  • committing the offence was the only reasonable way to avoid the threatened harm, and * their conduct was a reasonable response to the threat.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

once the defence raises duress who has the burden of proof

A

the prosecution will hold the burden of proving BRD that the accused didn’t act under duresss

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

sudden or extraordinary emergency

A
  • there was a sudden or extraordinary emergency
  • their actions were the only reasonable way of dealing with the situation, and
  • their actions were a reasonable response to the situation.
    once the accused raises the defence of a sudden or extraordinary emergency, the burden of proof will fall on the prosecution to prove BRD that the accused didn’t act in the circumstances of a sudden or extraordinary emergency
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

automatism

A

a state in which a person has a total loss of control over their bodily movements
(i.e. is not conscious or aware of what they are doing), so that they cannot form an intention to commit a crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what are some conditions that constitute to automatism

A
  • while sleeping or sleepwalking
  • while suffering concussion
  • during an epileptic seizure, or
  • as a result of a medical condition or because of a side
    effect of the proper use of medication.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

burden of proof for automatism

A

varies according to the cause of automatism but in general the pros must prove BRD that the accused acted voluntarily

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

intoxication

A

may use intoxication if at the time of the offence they acted involuntarily or without intent due to being intoxicated due to consuming drugs, alcohol or other
to successfully argue intoxication they must not be self induced

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

accident

A

with the exception of strict liability offences for an accused to be found guilty they must have a mens rea meaning the prosecution must prove BRD that their actions were deliberate and intentional
accidents would apply if the actions were involuntary, unintentional, reasonably unforeseeable by an ordinary person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

unfit to stand trial means that they can’t:

A

understand the nature of the charges laid against them
enter a plea
follow the course of the trial
instruct their lawyer

17
Q

unfit to stand trial vs mental impairment

A

unfit to stand trial- at the time of the trial
mental impairment- when they committed the offence