intoxication Flashcards
only works if…
it negates D’s mens rea
to establish if D has mens rea and if its been negated but work out…
- was the intoxication voluntary or involuntary
- if the offence D is charged with is a basic or specific intent offence
2 types of intoxication
- voluntary
- involuntary
voluntary intoxication
where D has chosen to take an intoxicating substance eg. alcohol or illegal drugs
what else counts as voluntary intoxication
where they know that the effects of a prescribed drug will make them intoxicated
involuntary intoxication
D is not aware that they are taking an intoxicating substance eg. spiking, unusual effect of a prescribed drug
Allen
if D knows they are taking an intoxicating substance but is unaware of its strength this will be treated as voluntary intoxication
Hardie
if D knows he is taking an intoxicating substance but is unaware of the effects it will have will be treated as involuntary intoxication
what mens rea do specific intent crimes require
has to be intention
what mens rea do basic intent crimes require
recklessness is enough
specific intent crimes
- murder
- robbery
- burglary- 9(1)(a) and
9(1)(a) - attempts
- S18 (GBH and wounding)
- theft
basic intent crimes
- assault
- battery
- S47 ABH
- S20 GBH/ wounding
- involuntary manslaughter
- S9(1)(b)
DPP V Majewski
voluntary intoxication will never be a defence to basic intent crimes as D will always have been reckless in becoming intoxicated, so will still have required mens rea
Lipman
D will not be convicted of a specific intent offence if the intoxication prevents him from forming the mens rea of the offence
AG for Northern Ireland V Gallagher
if the D has the required mens rea of the specific intent offence (despite his intoxicated state) then he will be guilty- drunk intent is still intent
Kingston
if the intoxication negates the mens rea then he will not be guilty of the specific intent crime. however if D still has the mens rea of the specific intent offence (despite the intoxication) he will be guilty- drugged intent is still intent
Hardie 2nd principle
when D is involuntarily intoxicated he has not been reckless in becoming intoxicated. if D does not have the actual mens rea of the crime then, D will not be guilty
Lipman principle 2
drunken mistakes can still allow a defence
