Denials of an Offence

Question 1

Define ‘denials of offending’

Answer 1

Where D did not complete the AR or MR for various reasons

Question 2

Define ‘defences of offending’

Answer 2

1) Justification: ‘Yes I did it (AR + MR) but I should be acquitted because I did the right thing. e.g., self-defence, necessity
2) Excuse: Yes I did it (AR + MR) but for a specific reason it would be unfair to punish me.
3) Exemptions: Yes I did it (AR + MR) but I lack capacity, I am a child <10, or ‘insane’, so not a subject of criminal law.

Question 3

What happens if a full defence applies

Answer 3

D is acquitted of the offence

Question 4

Define ‘prior fault’

Answer 4

E.g., if D was hallucinating because of prior drug-taking, in some cases the prior fault makes up for the absence of MR

Question 5

General Rules for Intoxication

Answer 5

Drunken intent is still intent

If D was so intoxicated, she did not know what she was doing = no MR, prior fault might substitute for missing MR

Question 6

When can prior fault substitute for missing MR - intoxication

Answer 6

1) D’s intoxication was voluntary
2) It was a basic intent offence
3) The intoxicating substance was dangerous
4) D lacked MR because of the intoxication

Then, D is liable

Question 7

Define / give an example of sane automatism

Answer 7

e.g. D drives dangerously because under attack by a swarm of bees

If D does not complete a voluntary act - no liability

Question 8

Limits of Automatism

Answer 8

1) What degree of control must be lost?

2) Prior fault / self induced
- e.g. not managing your insulin properly if your are a diabetic - subjectively foreseeable

3) Internal / external causes?

Question 9

Insanity (Insane Automatism)

Answer 9

1) Defect of reason
2) Caused by a disease of their mind
So as
3) Not to know nature and quality of act, or
4) Not to know that it is wrong

Must have 1 and 2 and one of 3 or 4.

Question 10

What are the courts powers when someone is deemed to be ‘insane’

Answer 10

1) Discharge absolutely
2) To make a treatment or supervision order
3) To send to hospital, with or without a restriction order

Question 11

Reform?

Answer 11

1) Problems with the insanity defence
- too wide (sleepwalkers, etc)
- too narrow (excludes volitional disorders)
- possibly in breach of human rights (Arts. 2, 3, 5, 6)

2) The context of insanity
- stigma