Criminal Law 6 Defences COPY Flashcards

1
Q

In what 2 ways can the defence of intoxication work?

A
  • negate the mens rea of an offence
  • influencing factor on another legal principle/defence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

When can intoxication operate to negate the mens rea?

A

Any crime where:
- involuntarily taken
- medical treatment taken voluntarily
- non-dangerous drugs taken voluntarily
(But only when intoxication negates men’s rea)
- specific intent needed (i.e. offence can’t be committed recklessly)

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

What does not count as involuntary intoxication?

A

Where D is aware they’re drinking alcohol but mistaken as to its strength

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

If someone was voluntary intoxicated by dangerous drugs/alcohol, and committed a specific intent crime, is intoxication defence available?

A

Yes: ask if D still formed the necessary mens rea?

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

If someone was voluntary intoxicated by dangerous drugs/alcohol and committed a basic intent crime, is intoxication defence available?

A

Less likely: ask would D have seen the risk if sober

E.g.
- throwing stones would have realised risk if sober - no defence
- smashed window because tripped when drunk - defence

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

How do intoxication and self-defence interact?

A

drunken mistake as to need for self-defence doesn’t count

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

How does intoxication interact with loss of control defence?

A

Loss of control defence cannot be approached with reference to intoxication
- But, if D is taunted as to his intoxication, can take it into account when consider gravity of qualifying trigger
- If D is addicted, this characteristic given to normal person test but normal person still has normal levels of tolerance/self-restraint and is sober

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

How does intoxication interact with diminished responsibility?

A

Depends on if the intoxication is:
a) independent of abnormality
b) as a result of ADS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

If intoxication is independent of mental abnormality, what is asked?

A

If despite intoxication,
- suffering from mental abnormality
AND
- mental abnormality substantially impaired his mental responsibility

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

If intoxication is a result of ADS, what is considered?

A
  • Whether ADS led D to drink, even if there was an element of choice
  • If it was, D’s responsibility was impaired.

(Attempts to rely on voluntary/temporary drunkenness even if based on habitual binge drinking, is not sufficient)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What can self defence only be used to protect against?

A

Imminent attack of physical force (not a threat to one’s peace of mind)

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

What is the test for self defence?

A
  • D honestly believed use of force was necessary
  • Level of force was objectively reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What kind of defence is self-defence?

A

A complete defence against all crimes

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

Is anticipatory self-defence allowed?

A

Yes

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

Can self-defence be used by an antagonist?

A

Yes

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

Can force be used against an innocent party?

A

Yes to prevent a crime being committed by someone else or to protect themselves

17
Q

What is the test for proving self-defence?

A
  1. D honestly believed use of force was necessary
  2. Level of force used was objectively reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be:
    - Non-Householder Cases: not reasonable if disproportionate
    - Householder Cases: not reasonable if grossly disproportionate: (i) was force grossly disprop in circumstances as D believed them to be (ii) whether level of force was reasonable
18
Q

Who holds the burden of proof for loss of control?

A

The prosecution: they must disprove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the D was acting under a loss of control

19
Q

What are the 3 requirements for loss of control defence?

A
  • D must have lost self-control
  • Due to fear and/or anger qualifying trigger
  • A normal person might have acted in a similar way
20
Q

When can the defence of loss of control not be used?

A
  • ‘revenge’
  • excuse to use violence
  • sexual infidelity
  • attempted murder
21
Q

What is the difference in burden/standard of proof for loss of control and diminished responsibility?

A

Loss of Control:
- burden on prosecution to disprove it once defence raises it;
- standard is beyond reasonable doubt

Diminished Responsibility:
- burden on defence to prove that D was acting under diminished responsibility
- on balance of probabilities

22
Q

What are the requirements for diminished responsibility?

A
  1. Abnormality of mental functioning
  2. Must arise from undiagnosed recognised medical condition
  3. Must have substantially impaired D’s ability to
    - understand the nature of C’s conduct,
    - form a rational judgement and/or
    - exercise self-control
  4. Abnormality must provide an explanation for D’s conduct - there’s a causal link
23
Q

What is the definition of a principal?

A

Person who, with appropriate mens rea, commits the actus reus
Can have more than 1

24
Q

What is an ‘innocent agent’?

A

Where the person who performs the actus reus is not the principal

25
Q

When can consent apply?

A
  • V consented
  • Offence is one that can be consented to
26
Q

Whose view matters for consent?

A
  • victim consented
  • D thought V consented

(Chuck off balcony)

27
Q

What crimes can consent apply to?

A

General rule, only assault and battery.

BUT

Can apply to ABH where:
- intended to commit battery with consent of V
- did not see risk of ABH

28
Q

What are the exceptions to consent for ABH and above?

A
  • medical treatment
  • tattoo etc.
  • sport (heat of game)
  • horseplay (balcony)
  • lawful correction of child
  • sex (not anymore)