Defences Flashcards
What is the defining case for Voluntary intoxication?
DPP v Majewski (1977)
Argued that he did the act but lacked the men’s rea due to intoxication and therefore didn’t have specific intent.
House of Lords accepted and Murder was reduced to manslaughter.
Rule: intoxication can negate mens rea.
How has the case of bailey further clarified the rule made by majewski for voluntary intoxication?
Diabetic, took insulin. Hypoglycemic attack.
Destinction drawn between intoxication and therapeutic drugs.
Why is Involuntary intoxication treated differently from voluntary intoxication
Consent.
Why doesn’t Kingston (1995) follow the rule for involuntary intoxication?
Given coffee spiked with sedatives and he assaults 15 year old boy.
BUT he had intent to assault before he drank spiked coffee.
Involuntary intoxication
Full defense. If proved will allow acquittal.
What is the rule governing necessity?
Which case described this rule?
Perka v Queen (1984)
” necessity covers all cases where noncompliance with the law is excused by an emergency or justified by the pursuit of some greater good”
What is the defense of necessity limited to?
It is limited to cases of emergency when something has to be done immediately to prevent harm and there is no opportunity to seek guidance or state protection. It is limited to cases where the harm threatened is of death or serious injury.
Can duress be a defense to murder?
No.
Case: Howe
What is the leading case on necessity?
Dudley and Stephens (1884)
-two shipwrecked sailors killed and ate cabin boy after days adrift.
Defense was rejected. No deference available which would allow the killing of an innocent to save ones own skin.
When can necessity be a justification?
Namely medical interventions.
Limited to cases where:
- needed to avoid inevitable evil
-no more done than reasonably necessary
-evil inflicted must not be disproportionate to that avoided.
E.g. Re A (conjoined twins) (2001) , the defense of necessity was used to justify an operation to separate conjoined twins who shared a heart. The necessity for the operation was that without it both twins would die. However the consequence of the operation was that one twin would immediately die.
What are the rules governing self defense?
Section 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large"
Which crimes can self defense be used?
All crimes involving the use of force (physical and preemptive)
State the rule governing duress and duress of circumstances.
As per graham (1982)
“Was the accused, or may he have been, impelled to act as he did because as a result of what he reasonable believed to be the situation he feared that otherwise death or serious injury would result, second, if so, would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the accused have responded to the situation by acting as the accused did?”
What are the seven restrictions to the defense of duress outlined in Hassan (2005)?
- The threat or danger must be of death or serious injury
- The threat must be directed against the defendant, his or her immediate family or be someone close to the defendant.
- The relevant tests are in general objective with reference to the reasonableness of the defendants perceptions and conduct
- The defense is available only where the criminal conduct which it is sought to excuse has been directly caused by the threats relied upon.
- There must have been no evasive action the defendant could reasonably have been expected to take
- The defendant must not voluntarily have laid the self open to the duress relied upon
- Duress maybe a defense to any crime except some forms or treason, murder and attempted murder.
What is the rule governing self defense?
“A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or of persons unlawfully at large”
Criminal law act S3(1)
What is the rule governing duress?
“Was the accused or may he have been impelled to act as he did because as a result of what he reasonably believed to be the situation he feared that otherwise death or serious injury would result. Second, if so, would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the accused have responded to the situation by acting as the accused did?”
Graham 1982
What is the rule governing necessity?
Necessity covers all cases where non compliance with the law is excused by an emergency or justified by pursuit of some greater good.
