Intoxication Flashcards
Two parts to intoxication?
Was the intoxication voluntary or involuntary
Was the crime of basic or specific intent
Specific intent
Crimes which require intention
S18
Murder
Basic intent
Crimes where recklessness will suffice the MR Assault,battery S47 S20 Manslaughter
Distinction between specific and basic intent
DPP v Beard- drew up the distinction
Majewski- this confirmed the distinction between specific and basic intent crimes
Which case said assault and battery are basic intent crimes
Majewski
Which case said rape is a basic intent crime
R v Woods
Which case states that murder is a specific intent crime
Lipman
Which case states that s18 is a specific intent crime
R v brown and Stratton
What is said about Dutch courage, and in which case?
Case: Attorney General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher
If the mens rea is formed before the intoxication, as in dutch courage, then there will be no defence of intoxication
Majewski says….
Becoming intoxicated is a reckless course of conduct
Therefore the defendant will be guilty of basic intent offences
Case for voluntary intoxication for basic intent
Majewski
Case for involuntary intoxication for basic intent
Hardie- the D has not been reckless as he didn’t choose to be intoxicated
Case for voluntary intoxication for specific intent
Gallagher- if the D has the mens rea he is guilty
Cases for involuntary intoxication for specific intent
Kingston- if the D has the mens rea he is guilty
Hardie-If the D has no MR he is not guilty
Where a defendant uses self defence as he incorrectly identified that he is under threat, due to the alcohol can he rely on this mistake?
Which case?
If the intoxication was brought on voluntarily then he cannot rely on intoxication for the mistake
Hatton
