Karteikarten
General defences in criminal law: insanity, automatism, consent
Karten in diesem Stapel (7)
- 1InsanityMcNaghten Rules 1843
4 Elements have to proven:
1. Defect of Reason
2. Caused by a disease of the mind
3. Causes the defendant to not know the nature and quality of his act
4. If he did know then he didn't know it was wrong - 2AutomatismBratty v A-G N.Ireland Lord Denning said "Automatism means an act which is done by the muscles without any control of the mind"
The cause must be EXTERNAL ( R v Quick)
Hill v Baxter (Bees in the Car)
- 3Voluntary IntoxicationDPP v Majewski
'Of his own VOLITION'
Drunkenness is a reckless course of conduct and is enough to constitute the necessary mens rea
- 4Involuntary IntoxicationNo mens rea occurring in 3 situations:
1. Drugs taken under medical prescription
2. The drugs are known to have a "soporific or sedative" effect (R v Hardie)
3. The alcohol or drugs are taken without the knowledge of the defendant e.g. a spiked drink
- 5MistakeDPP v Morgan
R v Gladstone Williams
R v Kimber
Beckford v R
Summary : an albeit unreasonable mistake negatives mens rea
- 6ConsentIn A-G Ref (No.6 of 1980) it was held that a person cannot consent to harm except under certain circumstances:
- Tattooing, Piercing, branding (R v Wilson)
- Sports as long as injury is within rules of the game (R v Barnes)
-Rough Horseplay (R v Jones R v Aitken + Others)
For consent to apply it must be valid and informed (R v Tabbassum)
Children and people with limited intelligence may not have the capacity to consent (R v Burrell and Harmer
- 7Private / Public DefenceThe force must be NECESSARY
The force used has to be REASONABLE
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Karteikarten am Ohne Titel, erstellt von Anthony Christophi am 12/06/2015.
- Erstellt von
- Anthony Christophi
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung