Mental defences Flashcards
what are the 3 parts to insanity
- defect of reasons
- disease of the mind
- nature and quality
explain defect of reason
- D must be impaired of their powers or reasoning
- forgetfulness or absentmindedness does not work
Clarke (1972)
shopping, forget, pay
- forgot to pay for shopping
- no defense as forgetfulness is not DoR
explain disease of the mind
the defect must be due to a disease of the mind. this can be mental or physical but must affect memory, reasoning and understanding
two part test:
1. continuing danger theory
2. external cause theory
explain continuing danger theory
if the condition continues and could result in danger then it’s a DoM
explain external cause theory
if the cause is internal then it’s a DoM
Burgess (1991)
sleepwalk, friend, hit
- invited his friend round and fell asleep.
- hit friend over the head
- defense given
explain nature and quality
- D must not know the nature and quality of their actions die to the condition
- if they do know the N+Q then they must prove threy didn’t know it was legally wrong
Windle (1952)
wife, loo, asprin
- D’s wife had severe mental health issues and wanted to die
- gave her 100 asprin and said “i suppose they will hang me for this”
- know it was legally wrong so no defnse
Define non insane automatism
- an act which is done by the muscles without any control by the mind such as a spasm, relfex action, or a convulsion
- or an act done by a person who is not conscoius of what he is doing
what are the 3 parts to non - insane automatism ?
- invol act due to an external cause
- external cause
- incapable of forming MR
explain invol act due to external cause
the act must be be involuntary where there is a complete destruction of voluntary control
Broome v Perkins (1987)
hypo, car, seizure
- D goes into a hypoglyceamic seizure and is swerving around and caused a crash
- no defense as he had controll over the wheel
explain external cause
- it may be due to an external cause
- eg: a blow to the head, traumatic event, swarm of bee’s
Quick (1973)
nurse, sit, hypo
- D suffered from diabetes
- had a hypo seziure
- sat ontop of a patient and attacked him
- got defence as the insulin was an external factor
explain incapable of forming MR
- D must be incapable of forming means rea due to the automatic state
Bilton (2005)
sleepwalk, woman, rape
- suffered from sexomnia
- whilst sleepwalking he raped the victim multiple times
- got the defence as he couldn’t intend it
what type of policy is intoxication
public policy
what are the two types of intoxication
- voluntary intoxication
- involuntary intoxication
what are the two areas to voluntary intoxication
- specific intent crimes
- basic iintent crimes
what are specifc intent crimes ?
- crimes that are intention only
- Eg: theft, attempts, robbery, burglary, murder(S18)
what defence is available for specific intent
- partial defence - if you can prove there was no mens rea
- theft there is no drop down so results in a full acquital
Litman
LSD, Kill, snake
- chose to take LSD and committed murder of his GF
- the trip made him think she was a snake
- got the defence as he had no intent to kill
what are basic intent crimes
- crimes that contain recklessness
- Eg: assault, battery, manslaughter
what defence is availiable for basic intent
- never a defence given
- as you are reckless by EG: drinking/ taking drugs
Majewski
bindge, ABH, drink
- chose to drink + drugs on a 48 hour binge
- committed various ABH’s
- no defence given as he chose to drink (recklessness)
what has to be proven for involuntary intoxication
D has to show they had no MR for the crime
what defence is available for involuntary intoxication
full acquittal
what are laced drinks
where spiking has taken pace
what is the rule for laced drinks
- soft drink - defence always works
- alcoholic - look at the nature of the case. harder to prove
kingston
pedophile, coffe
- D had coffe spiked
- filmed abusing a child
- defence failed as he still intended the crime
what are prescribed drugs
drugs prescribed by doctors for medical reasons
p
what is the rule for prescribed drugs
needs to be an unpredictable side effect to get the defence
Bailey
diabetes, attack
- suffered from diabetes
- takes insulin and went into a diabetic seizure - attacks someone (GBH)
- didn’t get the defence as wasn’t an unpredictable new he had to eat
what are soporific drugs
- calming drugs/ sleeping drugs
- Eg: valium
what is the rule for soporific drugs
defence available if the drugs have the opposite effect
Hardie
cuboard, fire
- takes valium and sets fire to the wardrobes in anger
- no defence given
- appeal judge said it was an invol reaction so got defence
intoxicated mistakes
if D makes a mistake whilst intoxicated there will be no defence given
Jaggard v Dickinson
drunk, window
- lost key on night out
- smashed window thinkking it was her friends and she would replace
- taxi driver dropped her at the wrong house
- got the defence as she could prove her friend would have consented to the damage (S5 CDA 1971)
Dutch courage
if D deliberatley drinks to provide courage to commit an offence they will be unable to raise the defence of intoxication
Gallagher
whisky, wife
- D drank a bottle of whisky to give him the courae to kill his wife
- no defence given
what happends if D is drunk and has a RMC/ AMF
told to ingore the drink and focus and only look at the condition
what happens if D has a Alcohol Dependency
have to look at how many drinks were voluntary and if there is any brain damage
AO3 evaluation
public policy
- law is public policy based - bad for D as defence is hard to achieve - good for society
- basic intent always fails the defence
- involuntary results in a full acquittal as its not your choice +
AO3 evaluation
development of law
- as the judges are making the laws, it keeps the laws modern and up to date
- goes againt parlimentary soverignty
AO3 evaluation
justice
- no drop down for theft so full acquittal - bad for society - message?
- intoxicated mistakes - unfair as when intox you are more likely to make errors
- invol intox - good for D as they get justice for them
AO3 evaluation
Vol/ Invol
- vol - partial defence is it too leniant - lipman
- invol - harsh laced drinks if only had 1 alcoholic drink hard to get defence
- invol - good as defence if no mr
