Insanity And Automatism Flashcards
M’Naghten (1843)
Defendant attempted to murder V but killed his secretary.
M’Naghten Rules (definition)
(Also Insanity definition)
- Every man is presumed sane until the contrary be proved to the satisfaction of the jury
- At the time of committing the act the accused must have a defect of reason from a disease of the mind
- which means D either does not know the quality of his act or does know, but not that it is legally wrong.
R V Clarke (1972)
D took items from a supermarket without paying. She claimed it was absentmindedness due to depression.
Held: D’s conviction was upheld as there was only a partial lack of awareness at the time of the crime.
R V Sullivan (1973)
D was suffering from a minor epileptic seizure when he attacked V and wasn’t aware of his actions.
Held: ‘insanity can be permanent, transient and intermittent’
Automatism definition
An act done by the reflex or the muscles without any control of the mind such as a spasm, reflex or a convulsion
It is an external cause.
R V Quick (1973)
D inflicted ABH on V whilst in a hypoglycaemic state due to diabetes.
Held: D’s mental state was not internally caused as he had failed to eat having taken insulin. It was ruled as Automatism.
R V Kemp (1957)
D irrationally attacked his wife with a hammer. He suffered from Arteriosclerosis (artery slowness)
Held: D’s condition was caused by a disease of the mind.
R V Hennessy (1989)
D’s wife left him and he forgot to take insulin. He stole a car and wasn’t aware that he had taken it due to being in a hypoglycaemic state.
R V Windle (1952)
D’s wife was insane and constantly threatening suicide so he killed her by giving her 100 aspirins. When he was arrested, he said ‘I suppose they’ll hang me for this’
Held: D was suffering from communicated insanity however he was still aware of his actions as shown by his remark when he was arrested.
AG reference no.2
D was driving a lorry for 6 hours, he drove 700 yards on the hard shoulder and collided with a van, killing two people.
Held: automatism must be total destruction of voluntary control
R V T (1990)
D was raped and suffered from PTSD. She went on to commit robbery and ABH.
Held: D suffered from PTSD which served as the disease of the mind. This case was the first of its kind and since rape would be significantly damaging to the mind, it was held as non-insane automatism
R V Bailey (1983)
D hit ex’s new boyfriend with an iron bar. D was a diabetic who forgot to eat after taking insulin.
Held: the case went on to appeal but D was convicted for wounding with intent as the defense of non-insane automatism could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt to the jury.
