GoConqr hat ein neues Design! Sag uns, wie es dir gefällt.

Karteikarten

Intoxication overall

Charlotte Silvester Law A2 A2 Englisch 22 Karten

Karten in diesem Stapel (22)

  1. 1MajewskiD went on a 36 hour drugs and drink marathon. Over that time, he assaulted a customer and the manager and some police officers. Charged with 3 offences of ABH & 3 offences of assaulting a police officer whilst on duty. He stated that he was so intoxicated that he could not foresee the consequences of his actions.
  2. 2IntoxicationIntoxication can arise through drink or drugs or both. It can be voluntary or involuntary. This defence is all about putting doubt into the minds of magistrates or jury's as to whether D formed the necessary Mens rea. It is an area governed by case law.
  3. 3The law is as follows:# Intoxication is no defence if, despite the intoxication D formed the mens rea e.g. you retained awareness
    # Where D is involuntarily intoxicated & failed to form the mens rea, D is entitled to an acquittal
    # Where D was voluntarily intoxicated & failed to form the mens rea, D is entitled to be acquitted if the offence charged is one of the specific intent. However if it was basic intent he would be guilty because he was reckless
  4. 4Voluntary intoxicationIn the case of Beard, the judge stated that if D had no malice aforethought for murder then he should be committed under manslaughter. Fallback is most appropriate
  5. 5Sheehan and MooreD's were very drunk and they threw petrol over a tramp and set him on fire but they claimed that they were too drunk to form the intent to skill. They were not guilty of murder but of manslaughter
  6. 6Coley (2013)User of cannabis and violent video games who attacked a neighbour. The judge refused insanity as it was voluntary intoxication.
  7. 7HeardD was in an emotional state and was cutting himself. He was taken to hospital and he became very abusive and then he exposed himself and rubbed his penis on a police officer's leg. He was charged and convicted of intentional sexual touching. The judge classified this as a basic intent crime.
  8. 8Past intoxicationHarris - past alcoholic who had stopped drinking a few days, he had hallucinations. His appeal was allowed as it was seen as past voluntary intoxication
  9. 9Basic intent crimes and specific intent crimesThere is a fallback argument all have this except for theft.
    Specific intent - can be committed intentionally
    Basic intent - committed recklessly
  10. 10specific intent and basic intentspecific intent - murder, s18, theft, robbery, attempts and burglary.
    basic intent - manslaughter, s20, s47, assault and battery sexual offences and criminal damage/arson.
  11. 11Intoxication & basic intent offences - What D a sober man would have foreseen in that conditionRichardson& Irwin - 3 students at surrey uni got very drunk and went to their accommodation, they decided to throw a boy off their balcony which injured him. the CoA said the question should have been what would they have foreseen if they were not drinking.
  12. 12Involuntary intoxicationKingston - D was a paedophile and he was being blackmailed. a 15 year old boy was allured and naked on a bed and Kingston was asked to abuse him which he did. He claimed his coffee was drugged. The CoA said 'a drug intent was still an intent'. He was guilty.
  13. 13The main situations where the intoxication may be involuntary are:* Substance taken with a medical prescription
    * Substances that commonly have a sedative effect.
    *Substances taken without D's knowledge
    *Substances taken under duress
  14. 14Drugs taken under a medical prescriptionBailey - diabetic who took insulin but did not eat. He attacked ex - boyfriend's girlfriend causing a cut. First said it was self inflicted. on appeal said this was wrong since there was no drugs or alcoholic included. It depended on if D knew that not eating would produce this reaction
  15. 15SedativesHardie - D was depressed, his relationship ended. He was moving out of the flat but he decided to take some Valium tablets which produced an unexpected reaction and he was set a cupboard on fire. Arson = basic intent crime. He was acquitted
  16. 16Lack of knowledgeThis is where a soft drink has been spiked. Allen - D was given homemade wine which he did not realise had a very high alcohol content. He became extremely drunk and carried out a sexual assault. There was no evidence that Allen's drinking anything other than voluntary.
  17. 17Lack of knowledgeYou can also rely upon defence of involuntary intoxication when your drink is spiked with an entirely different type of intoxicant. Eatch - He had cannabis and a beer with a much stronger drug was added. This was involuntary intoxication
  18. 18Intoxication & DuressDutch Courage: Gallagher - D decided that he would kill his wife so he went out and bought himself a whiskey and he drank half of it. He then killed his wife. When a man is sane and sober and forms the intent to kill, but gets drunk to give him courage. Guilty
  19. 19AutomatismSelf induced intoxication is not a defence to automatism. Lipman - LSD resulted in a bad trip, he had a dream that he was being attacked by snakes. When he woke up he found his gf to be stuffed with half a bed sheet down her mouth. Could not be murder because no intent but manslaughter due to fallback
  20. 20Intoxication and mistakeThere is no defence to a mistake caused by self induced intoxication. Fotheringham - D came home very drunk and got into bed where the babysitter had decided to sleep. He didn't realise it wasn't his wife. He had sex with her which is a basic intent crime. He was reckless.
  21. 21Self DefenceO'Grady - D had been drinking heavily and then he fell asleep, he woke up and he thought the V was attacking him so he threw an ash - tray and hit the V. The D misjudged the situation, it was an intoxicated mistake
  22. 22There has been one exceptionJaggard v Dickinson - D was very drunk and went to what she thought was a friend's house, she broke a window as he believed the friend would have consented. As she was drunk she went to the wrong house. This case is an exception to the general rule because she had an honest belief that the person who owned the property would have consented.

Informationen

Beschreibung
A2 Law A2 Karteikarten am Intoxication overall , erstellt von Charlotte Silvester am 21/01/2016.
Aufrufe
0
Bewertung

Feedback

Worum geht es?

Wie gefällt dir das neue Design?

Dein Eindruck