Defences Flashcards

1
Q

What is insanity in legal terms?

A

A general defence available to all offences that results in a special verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’ if successful.

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

What is the significance of diminished responsibility in murder cases?

A

Diminished responsibility is easier to prove than insanity in murder cases.

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

What are the possible sentencing options if the insanity defence is successful?

A

Options range from absolute discharge to an unlimited hospital order.

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

What must be proven regarding the defendant’s mental state at the time of the offence for insanity?

A

D must have been insane at the time of committing the offence.

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

What are the three elements defined by the M’Naghten Rules for insanity?

A
  • D must have been suffering from a defect of reason
  • Must have been caused by a disease of the mind
  • Caused D not to know the nature and quality of his acts OR that what he was doing was wrong.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is a defect of reason in the context of insanity?

A

A state where D is deprived of their powers of reasoning.

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

In Clarke, what was determined regarding absent-mindedness and insanity?

A

Moments of absent-mindedness or confusion do not amount to insanity.

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

What is required for a disease of the mind in the context of insanity?

A

The defect of reason must be caused by any internal mental or physical disease.

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

What was established in the case of Sullivan regarding the source of the disease?

A

The source of the disease is irrelevant as long as it’s internal and existed at the time D acted.

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

What does it mean if the defendant does not know the nature and quality of his acts?

A

D is not aware of what he is doing or that it is legally wrong.

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

What is automatism in legal terms?

A

A general defence available to all offences that results in complete acquittal if successful.

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

How is automatism defined by Lord Denning in Bratty?

A

An act done by the muscles without any control of the mind.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are the two elements that must be proved for automatism?

A
  • The D was acting entirely involuntarily
  • This was caused by an external factor.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What distinguishes automatism from insanity?

A

Automatism is caused by an external factor, while insanity is caused by an internal factor.

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

What is self-induced automatism?

A

Where the automatic state was brought on by an action of the D.

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

How does self-induced automatism affect the availability of defence?

A

If D knew their actions would likely cause an automatic state, they will have a partial defence to specific intent offences.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is the main difference between voluntary and involuntary intoxication?

A

Voluntary intoxication reflects fault of the D, while involuntary intoxication does not.

18
Q

In the context of intoxication, what is the significance of mens rea?

A

For specific intent offences, the test is whether D had the relevant mens rea despite being intoxicated.

19
Q

What does the case of Sheehan and Moore establish about drunken intent?

A

A drunken intent is still an intent.

20
Q

What is the effect of intoxication on basic intent offences?

A

If D is voluntarily intoxicated, they will have no defence of intoxication for basic intent offences.

21
Q

What are the two elements of self-defence/prevention of crime?

A
  • Was the use of force necessary?
  • Was the force reasonable?
22
Q

What is the subjective test in self-defence regarding necessity?

A

The court requires proof that D genuinely believed the use of force was necessary.

23
Q

What does S.76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 state about mistaken beliefs?

A

D cannot rely on any mistaken belief attributable to voluntary intoxication.

24
Q

What principle does Palmer establish regarding the use of force in self-defence?

A

A person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action.

25
What is the significance of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 for householders?
Householders may use disproportionate force against intruders, which can be regarded as reasonable.
26
What are the two separate defences of duress?
* Duress by threats * Duress by circumstances.
27
What is the Graham test in the context of duress by threats?
* Was D compelled to act because they reasonably feared death or serious injury? * Did D respond as a sober person of reasonable firmness would have?
28
What does the case of Valderrama-Vega confirm about threats?
Only threats of death or serious injury will suffice, but cumulative threats may be considered.
29
What does the characteristic of reasonable firmness include?
Characteristics such as age, pregnancy, serious physical disability, and recognized medical/psychiatric conditions.
30
What happens if there is a safe avenue of escape in the context of duress?
D cannot rely on the defence if they had a safe avenue of escape.
31
What is self-induced duress?
When D has put themselves in a position likely to face coercion, they may not have the defence available.
32
What is self-induced duress?
Where D has put himself in a position where he is likely to be forced to commit a criminal offence ## Footnote Examples include joining a gang, dealing drugs, or borrowing money from a loan shark.
33
Under what circumstances may D lose the benefit of the defence based on duress?
If he ought reasonably to foresee the risk of coercion ## Footnote This principle was established in the case of Hasan.
34
What is duress of circumstances?
Where circumstances force D to commit a criminal act ## Footnote It involves a claim that failing to act would result in death or serious harm to themselves or another.
35
What case confirmed the two-part test for duress of circumstance?
Martin ## Footnote This case established that the same principles and limitations apply to duress of circumstances as those considered in duress by threats.
36
What is a key requirement for a claim of duress of circumstances?
D must show that failing to act would result in death or serious harm.
37
True or False: Self-induced duress is a valid defence in all situations.
False ## Footnote The defence may not be available if D has put himself in a risky situation.
38
Fill in the blank: The law must discourage associations with _______.
known criminals
39
What is the relationship between duress by threats and duress of circumstances?
The same principles and limitations apply to both ## Footnote This was established in the context of legal tests and definitions.
40
What does the term 'coercion' refer to in the context of duress?
The act of forcing someone to commit a criminal offence against their will.