Intoxication (AO1) Flashcards
What is the AO1 for intoxication split into?
-Intro
-Voluntary intoxication
-Involuntary intoxication
What would you write for the intro for intoxication?
-Defence of intoxication means the D failed to form mens rea due to alcohol, drugs or other substances
-Explain that the defence is found in common law and distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary intoxication
-Explain that in voluntary intoxication there is a difference between crimes of specific and basic intent
-Explain intoxication is only a partial defence as it lessens charge to that of a lesser offence (except theft full acquittal)
What is the intro for intoxication summarised?
-Failed mens rea
-Found in common law
-Difference specific / basic intent
-Partial defence
What is the voluntary intoxication main body summarised?
-Negate mens rea
-Dutch courage
-Not defence for basic intent
-fall back principle
What would you write for the 4 voluntary intoxication points?
-Voluntary intoxication can negate the mens rea needed for a specific intent offence (Beard)
-Getting intoxicated for dutch courage won’t succeed as a defence as stated in (Gallagher)
-Intoxication is not a defence for basic intent crimes, not a defence if reckless in becoming intoxicated in the first place as stated in Majewski (softer approach in Richardson & Irwin)
-If pleaded successfully the ball back principle = guilty of a lesser charge
What is the involuntary intoxication main body summarised?
-D not know he was taking substance
-Necessary MR?
-If successful
-Prescribed medication
-Intoxicated mistake
-basic intent crimes no defence
-Amount of force in self-defence
-Exception criminal damage act
What is the first 4 points of the involuntary intoxication body?
-Involuntary intoxication is where the D did not know he was taking an intoxicating substance
-It must be tested if the D had necessary MR when he committed the offence, if he did defence fails as seen in (Kingston) If no MR defence succeed as seen in (Pearson)
-If plea successful complete defence and acquittal
-Provides a defence when prescribed medication is taken as directed and has unpredictable effect (Hardie)
What are the second 4 points of the involuntary intoxication body?
-If a mistake is induced by intoxication there is rarely a defence
-May be a defence for a specific intent, but none for basic intent (Fotheringham)
-If there a mistake about amount of force in self-defence will always fail (O’Grady)
-Exception provided by S5 Criminal Damage Act 1971 (Jaggard v Dickinson)
What is the principle of DPP v Beard?
a man who voluntarily intoxicates himself and destroys his will power shall be no better situated in regard to criminal acts than a sober man.
What is the principle of Richardson and Irwin?
Convictions quashed because even if a reasonable, sober man would have foreseen some harm, the Ds were not sober
What is the principle of Hardie?
As the D voluntarily consumed the valium, his intoxication wasn’t a defence to the crime committed
What is the principle of Fotheringham?
Self induced intoxication was no defence as it made the belief in consent unreasonable
What is the principle of O’Grady?
It ruled that a drunken mistake can be used to partially negate MR and not justify unreasonable force in self-defence
What is the principle of Jaggard v Dickinson?
Appeal allowed because intoxication can be used to substantiate an honest belief under s5(2)
