Insanity Flashcards
Define insanity – Section 23 CA61
• (1) Everyone shall be presumed to be sane at the time of doing or omitting any act until the contrary is proved.
• (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.
What was held in case law Cottle? (Burden of Proof of 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.
What is the burden of proof for insanity?
The accused is not required to prove the defence of insanity beyond reasonable doubt, but to the satisfaction of the jury on the balance of probabilities.
Outline M’Naghten’s rules
• The M’Naghten’s rules is frequently used to establish whether or not a defendant 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.
What the accused’s state of mind was at the time of the offence is a question decided by whom
The jury
A Question of Law relating to whether the condition is a disease of the mind is answered by whom?
The judge
Which of these statements is correct
(a) Disease of the mind includes a temporary mental disorder, such as sleepwalking, a blow to the head, or the effects of drugs
(b) Disease of the mind does not include a temporary mental disorder caused by some other factor external to the defendant, such as a blow to the head, taking drugs or alcohol, or an anaesthetic, or hypnotism
(c) Disease of the mind includes a temporary mental disorder caused by some other factor external to the defendant, such as a blow to the head, taking drugs or alcohol, or an anaesthetic, or hypnotism
(b)
Dio is on trial for the theft of Jonathan’s dead body. It is discovered that prior to the murder, Dio has consumed 37 bottles of Blueberry Soju. R v Kamipeli makes it clear that for the defence of intoxication to succeed as a defence –
a) The defence only needs to establish reasonable doubt about the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the offence
b) The defence needs to prove on balance of probabilities that the defendant had no intent at the time the offence as committed.
c) The defence needs to establish reasonable doubt about the Defendant’s actus reus at the time the offence was committed.
(a)
A French man travels to NZ and doesn’t know that you must drive on the left side of the road. Subsequently, he runs some poor Marnus over and absolutely splatters him. Section 25 details that the defence of ignorance of the law cannot be used for any offence. who does this apply to?
a) Only to permanent residents of NZ
b) All persons in NZ apart from temporary foreign visitors
c) All persons in New Zealand, whether visiting or permanent residents
(c)
Mandy is on trial for murder. It is discovered that Mandy had formed the intent to commit the offence, and then drank 2 bottles of whisky to gain ‘Dutch Courage’ to commit it. Which of the following is correct?
a) The defendant is disqualified from using a defence of intoxication or automatism
b) The defendant can use the defence of automatism, but not intoxication.
c) The defendant can use the defence of intoxication, but not automatism.
(a)
