Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

A2 Law - Defence Of Intoxication > Voluntary Intoxication > Flashcards

Voluntary Intoxication Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Is the defence of intoxication available for Dutch courage?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is voluntary intoxication?

A

Where the defendant has chosen to take an intoxication substance such as drugs or alcohol or if they have taken a prescribed drug they know they will have an adverse reaction to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What type of crime needs to have been committed for the defence of intoxication to be available to you?

A

A specific intent crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

How has the law on voluntary intoxication changed?

A

It is now comparatively lenient as at one point it was not regarded as a defence at all

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Who first considered voluntary intoxication, specific intent crimes and the defence of intoxication?

A

Lord Birkenhead in DPP v Beard (1920)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What did Lord Birkenhead say in DPP v Beard (1920)?

A

‘Evidence of the state of drunkenness rendering the accused incapable of forming such an intent should be taken into consideration to determine whether he in fact had the intent necessary to constitute the particular crime’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the case of DPP v Beard (1920) relevant to?

A

Lord Birkenhead recognising that the defence could be available to specific intent crimes if one is involuntarily intoxicated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What case happened in 1920?

A

DPP v Beard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

In what year was the case of DPP v Beard?

A

1920

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

If you are voluntarily intoxicated, when is the defence available to you?

A

If it is a specific intent crime and the defendant does not have the required mens rea for the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What case happened in 1975?

A

R v Sheehan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

In what year was the case of R v Sheehan?

A

1975

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the case of R v Sheehan (1975) relevant to?

A

‘A drunken intent is nevertheless an intent’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

In what case was the jury directed that ‘a drunken intent is nevertheless an intent’?

A

R v Sheehan (1975)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was established in the case of R v Sheehan (1975)?

A

‘A drunken intent is nevertheless an intent’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

In relation to R v Sheehan (1975), explain ‘drunken intent is nevertheless an intent’…

A

If the defendant had intention when they were drunk, they still had intention - they must not have the mens rea. It helps clarify the law and that the defence asks more than just the question ‘would the defendants have committed the offence if they were sober?’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is the case of Bratty (1963) relevant to?

A

Denning clarifying the distinction between specific and basic intent crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

In what year was the case of R v Bratty?

A

1963

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What case took place in 1963?

A

R v Bratty

20
Q

In what case did Lord Denning help distinguish between basic and specific intent crimes?

A

R v Bratty (1963)

21
Q

What did Lord Denning say in the case of R v Bratty (1963)?

A

‘Specific intent crimes can only be committed intentionally, basic intent crimes can be committed recklessly’

22
Q

What is the leading case on involuntary intoxication and specific intent?

A

R v Lipman (1970)

23
Q

What case happened in 1970?

A

R v Lipman

24
Q

In what year did the case of R v Lipman take place?

A

1970

25
Q

What is the case of R v Lipman (1970) relevant to?

A

Voluntary intoxication and specific intent crimes

26
Q

What happened in the case of R v Lipman (1970)?

A

Lipman and his girlfriend took LSD, he suffocated his girlfriend believing she was a snake attacking him as a result of hallucinations.

27
Q

What was the outcome of R v Lipman (1970)?

A

Lipman received a fallback offence of manslaughter rather than murder because he did not have the required mens rea of intention necessary for murder as he was high on drugs.

28
Q

Is the defence of intoxication available to those who are voluntarily intoxicated who have committed crimes of basic intent?

A

No

29
Q

What cases are relevant to voluntary intoxication and basic intent?

A

DPP v Majewski (1977)

R v Heard (2007)

30
Q

What case happened in 1977?

A

DPP v Majewski

31
Q

In what year did the case of DPP v Majewski happen?

A

1977

32
Q

What is the case of DPP v Majewski relevant to?

A

The Majewski rules being created

33
Q

What was the outcome of DPP v Majewski (1977)?

A

The House of Lords rejected that the defendant didn’t have the necessary mens rea because he was intoxicated and thus created the Majewski rule, that if you reckless in becoming so intoxicated you do not know what you are doing the recklessness needed for the mens rea of the crime is substituted by the defendants reckless behaviour in getting so intoxicated.

34
Q

What is the Majewski rule?

A

That if you reckless in becoming so intoxicated you do not know what you are doing the recklessness needed for the mens rea of the crime is substituted by the defendants reckless behaviour in getting so intoxicated.

35
Q

What are examples of crimes of specific intent?

A

Murder
Wounding with intent
Causing GBH with intent
Theft, robbery and burglary attempts

36
Q

What is the mens rea for specific intent crimes?

A

Intention

37
Q

What are examples of crimes of basic intent?

A 
Involuntary manslaughter 
Rape
Wounding (s20)
Inflicting GBH (s20)
ABH
Assault and battery
Criminal damage
38
Q

What is the mens rea for crimes of basic intent?

A

Primarily recklessness but it can be intention (but ignore the intention part really as that makes it unclear)

39
Q

What is the case of R v Heard (2007) relevant to?

A

The Majewski principle being put to use and that the defence of intoxication not being available to you if you have voluntarily become intoxicated and have committed a basic intent crime

40
Q

What case happened in 2007?

A

R v Heard

41
Q

In what year was the case of R v Heard?

A

2007

42
Q

What case is an example of the Majewski principle at use?

A

R v Heard (2007)

43
Q

What happened in the case of R v Heard (2007)?

A

The defendant was intoxicated and rubbed his penis up and down a police officers thigh. When he sobered up he said he couldn’t remember anything, but when he is drunk he has a tendency to ‘go silly and start stripping’. He was charged with sexual assault under s3 sexual offences act 2003.

44
Q

What was the outcome of R v Heard (2007)?

A

He was charged with sexual assault under s3 of the sexual offences act 2003. This requires, among other things, they the defendant touched the victim intentionally. The ruled the touching to be intentional, but even if it hadn’t, he should not not have been so reckless in getting so drunk (Majewski rules) - remember as denning stated ‘drunk intent is still intent’

45
Q

What type of intoxication do the Majewksi rules apply to?

A

Voluntary only

46
Q

If the defence of intoxication is available to someone who has committed a crime of specific intent whilst voluntarily drunk what is the outcome?

A

They will receive a fallback offence

A2 Law - Defence Of Intoxication (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions