Defences Involving State of Mind Flashcards
Insanity - 23(1) - Every one shall be presumed sane
(1) Every one shall be presumed to be sane at the time of doing or omitting any act until the contrary is proved.
Insanity - 23(2) - No person shall be convicted
(2) No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of an act done or omitted by him when labouring under natural imbecility or disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable—
(a) Of understanding the nature and quality of the act or omission; or
(b) Of knowing that the act or omission was morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong.
Insanity - 23(3) - Evidence of insanity
(3) Insanity before or after the time when he did or omitted the act, and insane delusions, though only partial, may be evidence that the offender was, at the time when he did or omitted the act, in such a condition of mind as to render him irresponsible for the act or omission.
What part of legislation addresses the issue of the defendant posing a risk to the community by reason of their mental health?
S54 Mental Health Act - restricted patient order
What was held in R v Green regarding the issue of insanity?
That insanity is a matter for the defence to raise and the prosecution is prohibited from adducing evidence of insanity.
For what two reasons may the Court make an order for the defendant to be treated as a patient under the Mental Health Act?
- That it is in the offender’s interest
- For reasons of public safety.
Can the Crown call evidence of insanity?
No. Instead any relevant evidence of insanity should be offered to the defence, leaving it to the defendant to put up the plea of insanity if they wish to do so.
What is the standard of proof required to show that a defendant is insane?
Balance of probabilities.
R v Cottle
Burden of proof for insanity
As to degree of proof, it is sufficient if the plea is established to the satisfaction of the jury on a preponderance of probabilities without necessarily excluding all reasonable doubt.
Insanity - Medical or legal question?
Legal. However, the question of whether or not the defendant is legally insane is usually addressed by evidence from medical experts called by defence and Crown.
BAAAH
Examples of temporary mental disorders not included
Some factor external to the defendant such as:
- a Blow on the head
- the Absorption of drugs
- Alcohol
- an Anaesthetic
- Hypnotism.
R v Clark
The decision as to an accused’s insanity
The decision as to an accused’s insanity is always for the jury and a verdict inconsistent with medical evidence is not necessarily unreasonable. But where unchallenged medical evidence is supported by the surrounding facts a jury’s verdict must be founded on that evidence which in this case shows that the accused did not and had been unable to know that his act was morally wrong.
M’Naghten’s Rules
If a person is insane
It is based on the person’s ability to think rationally, so that if a person is insane they were acting under such a defect of reason from a disease of the mind that they did not know:
- the nature and quality of their actions, or
- that what they were doing was wrong.
Disease of the mind
- Defies precise definition
- Can comprehend mental derangement in the widest sense.
Physical damage not necessary
A condition may be a disease of the mind whether or not there is any damage to the brain or other physical organ, the law being concerned with the “mind” — the mental faculties of reason, memory, and understanding; and the disorder may be permanent or temporary, of short or long duration, curable or incurable.
R v Codere
Nature and quality of the act
The nature and quality of the act means the physical character of the act. The phrase does not involve any consideration of the accused’s moral perception nor his knowledge of the moral quality of the act. Thus a person who is so deluded that he cuts a woman’s throat believing that he is cutting a loaf of bread would not know the nature and quality of his act.
Automatism - Definition
A state of total blackout, during which a person is not conscious of their actions and not in control of them.
R v Cottle - Action without conscious volition
Doing something without knowledge of it and without memory afterwards of having done it - a temporary eclipse of consciousness that nevertheless leaves the person so affected able to exercise bodily movements.
Automatism examples
- An act done whilst suffering from concussion
- Sleepwalking
BEAC
Automatism causes
- Brain tumor
- Epliepsy
- Arteriosclerosis
- Consumption of alcohol or drugs
Two types of automatism
Sane automatism - somnambulism (sleepwalking), a blow to the head or the effects of drugs
Insane automatism - mental disease
What does a successful plea of automatism negate?
Intent as well as responsibility for the actus reus, and the result is an unqualified acquittal.
Automatism induced by drink or drugs
In these circumstances the Court may be reluctant to accept that the actions were involuntary or that the offender lacked intention.
Intoxication
The general rule that intoxication may be a defence to the commission of an offence:
- where the intoxication causes a disease of the mind so as to bring S23 (insanity) into effect
- if Intent is required as an essential element of the offence and the drunkenness is such that the defence can plead a lack of intent to commit the offence
- where the intoxication causes a state of automatism (complete acquittal).
For intoxication to succeed as a defence, what does the defence have to prove?
That the defendant did not have the proper state of mind to be guilty.
What is a strict liability offence?
Any offence that does not require intent, only the act eg, drink driving
How can a defendant escape liability for a strict liability offence?
By proving a total absence of fault.
Ignorance of law
CA61; S25
The fact that an offender is ignorant of the law is not an excuse for any offence committed by him.
What is the likely result of a trial where the defendant is found to have been in a state of automatism from intoxication?
Complete acquittal
Temporary mental disorder not included
“Disease of the mind” does not include a temporary mental disorder caused by some factor external to the defendant, such as a blow on the head, the absorption of drugs, alcohol, or an anaesthetic, or hypnotism.
Although a defence of intoxication is unlikely to succeed, how else may it be used in Court proceedings?
It may be used by way of mitigation of penalty
