Intoxication as a defence in criminal law

Intoxication

Was the intoxication voluntary?

Is a general/complete defence

If yes, Did D chose to take the intoxicating substance?

If no, was D's drink spiked, take unexpected drug and it had an unexpected effect on D, was a calm drug and had unexpected opposite effect

was the mens rea negated?

If yes

SHEEHAN & MOORE(1975)

Was the offence of basic intent or specific intent ?

DPP v MAJEWSKI

offences with the mens rea of recklessness-Basic intent

D will have the defence if specific intent and did not form the mens rea

GALLAGHER v AG for North Ireland.

Do not get the defence 'A drunken intent is still an intent'

HARDIE(1984) - Will not be guilty of a basic intent offence unless he has been reckless in becoming intoxicated.

Did not know the Valium made his behaviour unpredictable

KINGSTON(1994)- Involuntary intoxication will not provide a defence if D had the necessary mens rea at the time of the offence