Defences Flashcards

1
Q

Self defence

A

A person can use force as is reasonable in the circumstances to defend himself or another or his property

All or nothing defence- either complete acquittal or convicted of full offence

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

Private defence

A

Defending himself or his property against an actual or imminent attack or defending another against such an attack

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

Public defence

A

Prevent the commission of an offence or effect a lawful arrest

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

Self defence act

A

S.76 criminal justice and immigration act 2008

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

Necessity of force

A

Subjective test- must be necessary in the circumstances which exist or what d genuinely believed existed

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

S.76 (3) CJIA act 2008

A

Ds claim will be judged on the facts as he genuinely perceives them to be

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

Mistaken beliefs

Gladstone Williams

A

D can be mistaken provided he genuinely believes there to be a necessity

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

Intoxication

S.76 (5) CJIA

A

If d is voluntarily intoxicated he cannot rely on his mistaken belief

O’grady

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

If the attack was imminent

A

Bird- does not have to wait for an attack to start but can get in the first blow

Hichens- violence can be aimed at an innocent third party

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

Reasonableness of force

A
S.76 (6) CJIA 
S.76 (7) CJIA 
palmer
Martin 
Clegg
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

S.76 (6)CJIA

A

the degree of force used by d will not be considered as reasonable if it was disproportionate in the circumstances as d believed them to be

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

S.76 (7) CJIA

A

A person may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action

And only done what be honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose

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

Palmer

A

Cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his necessary defensive action

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

Martin

A

If force used is excessive it will be unreasonable and the defence will fail

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

Clegg

A

Threat must still be present for defence to succeed

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

Burden of proof

A

Prosecution to prove to the jury beyond all reasonable doubt that it was either not acting to defend himself/another/property/to prevent a crime/ force was excessive

17
Q

Voluntary

A

D takes drink/drugs of his own free will

18
Q

Involuntary

A

D does not know he is taking alcohol or intoxicating drugs

19
Q

Involuntary intoxication

A

Has the effect of alcohol/drugs removed d’s intention and d was unable to form the mr of the offence, intoxication is a complete defence- acquittal

20
Q

Kingston

A

Intoxicated intent is still intent

21
Q

Allen

A

Not realising the strength of alcohol or drugs will not be classed as involuntary intoxication

22
Q

Basic intent offences

A

Include subjective recklessness in the mens rea

23
Q

Specific intent offences

A

Do not include subjective recklessness in the mens rea

24
Q

Voluntary intoxication basic intent

A

Voluntary intoxication is not a defence to crimes of basic intent

Majewski- voluntary intoxication is itself is reckless

25
Voluntary intoxication specific
Voluntary intoxication can be raised as a defence to crimes of specific intent if intoxication removes ds MR But still convicted of a corresponding lesser basic intent offence
26
Voluntary cases
Lipman Attorney general for n ireland v gallagher
27
Lipman
Voluntary intoxication can be a defence to murder but not manslaughter as manslaughter is basic intent
28
Attorney
If MR is formed before the offence no defence of intoxication
29
Insanity
Defined in m’naughten where d has a defect of reason caused by a disease of the mind.
30
1. Defect of reason
Inability to use powers of reason Lipman- if d was intoxicated no defence Clarke- being temporarily absent minded does not mean she was deprived of reason
31
2. Caused by a disease of the mind
Sullivan- legal and medical definition of disease of the mind are very different Kemp- disease of mind could be temporary Bratty- any mental disorder that could lead to violence that was likely to re-occur is a disease of the mind
32
3. D does not know the nature and quality of his act
Does one of the following apply He did not know what he was doing He did not appreciate the consequences of his act He did not appreciate the circumstances in which he was acting Or he doesn’t know what he was doing was legally wrong
33
Automatism
Must show that d’s act was in voluntary and caused by an external factor and was not self induced
34
1. An involuntary act
Bratty- in voluntary means an act which is done by the muscles without any control by the mind such as spasm, reflex action, convulsion Attorney generals reference no.2 of 1992- needs to be a total lack of awareness
35
2. Caused by an external factor
R v t- exceptional stress Diabetes- quick- failure To eat meant that the insulin caused his loss of control Examples of external factors – blow to the head (concussion), sneezing, hypnotism, effect of drug, attack by swarm of bees
36
3. Automatism was not self induced
Bailey- self induced automat is not acceptable