Mental Capacity Defences

Question 1

Mc naughten

Answer 1

d attempted to kill the prime minister but missed and killed the security due to delusions in his head telling him the Tory’s wanted to kill him. This case created insanity

Question 2

Clarke

Answer 2

D was shopping absent mindedly and putting items into her handbag instead of her basket then walked out. Held that the defect of reason must be more than absent mindlessness or confusion

Question 3

Kemp

Answer 3

man made a motiveless and irrational attack on his wife with a hammer, he had lost consciousness due to hardened arteries. Held it was a disease of the mind although it was physical

Question 4

Sullivan

Answer 4

D kicked a man at the time of amplectic fit, held the disease can be any part oof the body if it has an effect on the mind

Question 5

Hennessy

Answer 5

d stole a car, he was diabetic and forgot t take insulin making his blood sugar too high leading him to acting whilst being unaware. Held the hyper glyqemic state was caused by diabetes and not an outside factor

Question 6

Burgees

Answer 6

d smashes a bottle over a women’s head and then struck her with a video recorder whilst he was sleepwalking. Held sleepwalking is an internal factor and if d has a past record, they can plead insanity

Question 7

Quick

Answer 7

d attacked a patient whilst on duty, he had low blood sugars because he injected to much insulin. Held it wasn’t insanity because it was caused by an external factor- the injection

Question 8

Windle

Answer 8

• d’s wife constantly spoke of killing herself, D gave her too many aspirins and she overdosed and died, when arrested he said ‘ I suppose they will have me for this’ proving he knew his actions were legally wrong so could not plead insanity

Question 9

Johnson

Answer 9

charged with wounding to cause GBH he was skits phrenic he knew the actions were legally wrong but believed they were morally right, held the law doesn’t take morals into account

Question 10

Hill v Baxter

Answer 10

a swarm of bees’ fly’s through the car window and causes d to commit a motoring offence they are not guilty

Question 11

Rabey

Question 12

T

Answer 12

took part in robbery and ABH, she was in a dissociative state after suffering PTSD from rape, held rape is an external factor and PTSD is a disorder of the mind

Question 13

A-G ref

Answer 13

a lorry driver zoned out on a motorway where he hit a family that had broken down a killed 2 people, held driving without awareness was not automatism only a partial loss of control

Question 14

Bailey

Answer 14

convicted of wounding and intent for GBH on his love rival, he was diabetic and dint eat after taking insulin so his blood sugars were low, held it was self-induced and could only be used for basic intent crimes

Question 15

Hardie

Answer 15

d set light to a wardrobe after taking out of date Valium, instead of becoming calmer he went hyper and began setting fire to things, held if D takes drugs which had the opposite reaction it is automatism

Question 16

DPP V beard

Answer 16

murdered somebody whilst intoxicated, held if he was so drunk that he was incapable of forming the intent required he is not guilty

Question 17

Sheehan and Moore

Answer 17

d’s were drunk so set fire to a homeless person killing him, found guilty of manslaughter as its a basic intent crime

Question 18

Lipman

Answer 18

d and girlfriend had taken LSD, he was hallucinations and thought he was being attacked by a snake, so he strangled it and stuffed a duvet into its mouth- it was his girlfriend, murder dropped to manslaughter

Question 19

Northern Ireland v Gallagher

Answer 19

d drank a large amount of whiskey to give him Dutch courage before killing his wife. Held the defence failed because he formed the required men’s rea before drinking

Question 20

DPP v majewski

Answer 20

was drunk so lashed out and trashed a pub attacking the people in the pub and police officers trying to arrest him causing ABH, his conviction was upheld because getting drunk was the recklessness

Question 21

Richardson and Irwin

Answer 21

’s and v were drunk and started horseplaying the v was dropped off a balcony and sustained GBH injuries. The d’s conviction was quashed

Question 22

Kingston

Answer 22

d was a paedophile, he was spiked by a blackmailer, they showed him a 15-year-old boy and then was photographed trying to assault the boy. The hose of lords upheld the conviction of indecent assault and said the men’s rea was developed by going to the house

Question 23

Hardie

Answer 23

took out of date Valium which sent him hyper instead of calmer, so he set fire to a wardrobe, held he was involuntary intoxicated because the dug had the opposite effect

Question 24

Bailey

Answer 24

d didn’t eat after taking insulin and hit a love rival over the head with an iron bar, held intoxication can only be a defence for basic intent crimes

Question 25

Allen

Answer 25

- made homemade wine, it was too strong and he sexually assaulted people, held he was voluntarily intoxicated even though he was not aware of the strength

Question 26

Fotheringham

Answer 26

was drinking, he goes home and thought he was in bed with his wife, but it was the 14-year-old babysitter, his conviction of rape was upheld as it's a basic intent crime

Question 27

Ogrady

Answer 27

d killed his friend in self-defence over a fight in which he overestimated the risk and used excessive force held the d can't rely on self-defence caused by his own intoxication

Question 28

Hatton

Answer 28

drank 20 pints and attacked a man to death with a sledgehammer because he thought he was under attack held a mistake induced by intoxication cannot be relied on

Question 29

Jaggar v Dickinson

Answer 29

d broke into a house that he thought belonged to a friend. Held that it was an honest mistake