DEFENCE INVOLVING STATE OF MIND Flashcards
Insanity
What is the procedure where the defendant poses a risk to the community?
They can become the subject of a RESTRICTED PATIENT ORDER
(Mental Health Compulsory Assessment and Treatment Act 1992).
Can the Prosecution raise the issue of insanity when there is a risk to the public?
No. The Compulsory Assessment and Restricted Patient Order under s54(1) takes care of that.
R v Green - held it is only a matter for the Defense to raise.
If the Crown holds any relevant evidence of insanity, what must they do?
Put it in the hands of the defence to put up the plea of insanity if they want to.
If the defendant does not offer an Insanity defence, can a Judge still put the issue before the Jury? And can the judge still commit the defendant to a hospital or secure facility for treatment?
Both yes
Can a defendant be Aquitted on the basis of insanity even though they have not offered insanity as a defence?
Yes.
Section 20, Criminal Proceedings (Mentally Impaired Person Act 2003
What does entering a VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY ON ACCOUNT OF INSANITY BY CONSENT mean?
I means that BOTH the prosecution and the defense agree that the accused was legally insane at the time of the offense and therefore should not be held criminally responsible.
This avoids a full trial
The Judge must stull be satisfied the evidence supports the finding of insanity.
What case law sets the standard of proof for the defendant before a Jury when proving their INSANITY?
What does the case laws say?
Cottle:
A PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITIES is sufficient rather than EXCLUDING ALL REASONABLE DOUBT.
The evidence supporting the determination of INSANITY usually comes from MEDICAL EXPERTS.
So, is the determination of INSANITY a legal question or a medical one?
Despite the evidence being from medical opinions. The question is a LEGAL one.
What case law answers the question of decides a verdict of insanity? And what does the case law say?
Clark:
The JURY DECIDES the verdict of insanity based on finding the defendant had not known or was unable to know that his act was MORALLY WRONG
What are the two elements of the M’Naughten’s Rule:
- Did not understand the nature and quality of their act, or
- Did not know that their act was wrong (legally or morally).
Could EPILEPSY be considered a DISEASE OF THE MIND?
Yes. If it conforms to the M’Naughten’s Rule
Could intoxication or a blow to the head be considered a Disease of the mind?
No. These temporary affects are not considered a disease of the mind.
Is disease of the mind a medical or legal question?
Legal.
What case law defines the term, NATURE AND QUALITY of an act?
What does it say?
Codere:
NATURE AND QUALITY means the PHYSICAL CHARACTER of the act. It does not refer to any MORAL PERCEPTION.
If evidence shows the defendant did not know their actions were MORALLY WRONG, then could they be expected to have reasoned that their actions were still LEGALLY WRONG?
No. Without the moral perception it is regarded that they did not possess the rational ability to perceive the legal position.
When deciding the outcome of a case (Detention, Release, or Alternative Order) what must the judge consider?
In cases where judge is considering release or an alternative to detention, he must consider whether this is SAFE AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
In the case of serious homicide Who may direct the defendant to be held as a PATIENT or CARE RECIPIENT?
Attorney General
What case or deals with the subject matter AUTOMATISM?
What does it say?
RV Cottle:
A temporary ECLIPSE of CONSCIOUSNESS that nevertheless leaves the person able to exercise BODILY MOVEMENTS
What are two examples that may be classified as automatism?
Sleep walking
Concussion
Is there any criminal liability for Automatism?
No
Can alcohol and drugs cause automatism?
Yes
If someone does an act without the control of the mind what is this an example of?
SANE AUTOMATISM
If someone does an act without the control of the mind as a result of a mental disease what is this an example of?
INSANE AUTOMATISM
What is Strict Liability?
STRICT LIABILITY is a legal doctrine holding a party LIABLE for a violation without proof of INTENT or NEGLIGENCE, focusing on the ACT itself rather than the MENTAL STATE of the defendant.
What must be proven for the AUTOMATISM defense in intoxication cases?
Evidence must clearly raise the issue that the defendant acted as an AUTOMATON due to excessive drug or alcohol ingestion.
Can AUTOMATISM be raised for STRICT LIABILITY offenses in New Zealand?
Yes, the High Court has stated this defense can be raised for STRICT LIABILITY charges, such as driving with excess BREATH ALCOHOL.
Automatism.
Keech v Pratt held that:
if a defendant can show their intoxication was not their fault (e.g., due to automatism), they may avoid liability.
Given an example of an offence that does not require intent?
Drink-driving
Is the court likely to consider a defence of AUTOMATISM if the defendant was aware that their actions, like consuming drug or alcohol, could lead to problems (like committing a crime)?
No. The court is unlikely to accept automatism as a valid defense. The focus is on personal responsibility for the choices made regarding alcohol or drug use.
Give three instances where intoxication can be a defence?
(1) intoxication causes DISEASE OF THE MIND
(2) intoxication removes the capability for INTENT
Intoxication causes AUTOMATISM
Can intoxication be a defence for any crime requiring intent?
Yes
If a person forms the INTENT to commit a crime and then takes drink or drugs in order to help them commit the crime is INTOXICATION a defence in that case?
No. This will disqualify our defence of drunkenness or automatism.
Can INTOXICATION be used to establish IGNORANCE OF THE LAW?
No.
Simple intent.
If a person VOLUNTARILY consumes ALCOHOL or DRUGS and they commit an offence involving VIOLENCE or DANGER to any person, can they use INTOXICATION as a defence?
No. Such claims and mitigation are not permitted in cases where the offence is one of involving VIOLENCE or DANGER to any person.
Is ignorance of the law a defence?
What act and section applies to this?
No.
Section 25 of the crimes act 1961, says that ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
In offences requiring SIMPLE or BASIC INTENT can a claim of intoxication MITIGATE the penalty?
Yes. Intoxication can be used to medicate the penalty.
What must happen if the defendant’s condition may warrant a finding of insanity?
The issue must be presented to the jury, regardless of whether the defense has been raised, due to statutory requirements.
