Karteikarten
Automatism
Karten in diesem Stapel (18)
- 1The test for the defence of automatism-the act must be involuntary
-it must be caused by an external factor
-there must be a total loss of mental faculty
-D must be blameless - 2Limits to the defence of automatism-D exercised some control- any loss of mental faculty is not total
-where the state of automatism can come within the M'Naghten rules- the automatic state is caused by an internal factor
-where the conduct of D was not blameless- the automatism was self-induced - 3Raising the offence of automatism-successfully raising the defence leads to an acquittal as it is a complete defence
-if D raises automatism he/she must place evidence in support of the plea to the court
-Hill v Baxter 1958 indicated that D must usually support the plea with medical evidence
-this has recently been confirmed as a requirement in C 2007 - 4Automatism requires a complete loss of control: R v Isitt 1978-D involved in car accident after which he drove off erratically
-d claimed the original accident caused him to suffer psychiatric damage leading to a state of automatism
-appeal dismissed
-although his mind was not in top gear, he still had some control of the vehicle - 5Case 2: Broome v Perkins 1987-D drove erratically and hit a car
-afterwards didn't remember nothing about the journey, but seeing damage to his car, reported himself to the police
-convicted of driving without due care and attention.
-plea for automatism was rejected because he had been able to steer the car and apply the brakes.
therefore, had some voluntary control - 6Must be something such as a reflex action, spasm or convulsion: R v Woolley 1997-The defendant lorry driver, was travelling on the M62 in a queue of slow moving traffic. He suffered a sneezing fit, losing control of his vehicle he knocked into the car in front. This car in turn knocked into the car in front causing a domino effect involving 7 cars. The Magistrates allowed the defence of automatism. The appeal court held that the Magistrates were right to do so and that an attack of sneezing could amount to an involuntary action for the purposes of the defence of non-insane automatism.
- 7Act must be induced by an external factor: R v T 1990-D was raped. three days later later she took part in a robbery and an assault.
-claimed that she was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder as result of the rape, therefore, acted in a dream-like state
-the prosecution argues that her opening a pen knife blade suggested only a partial loss of control as per isitt 1978 and so automatism should be unavailable
-trial judge distinguished Isitt because T was in dream-like state
-allowed jury to consider automatism but convicted - 8The automatism must not be self-induced-If the defendant knowingly puts himself in a position of automatism, then the defence of non-insane automatism will fail
- 9Case example: Kay v Butterworth 1945-Kay was driving his car when he was overcome by sleep and ran into the rear of a column of soldier.
-he had been working all night and argued since he was asleep, he was not responsible
- judge Humphries said that automatism could be available id D became unconscious while driving through no fault of his own. e.g. struck by a stone, sudden illness or a swarm of bees
-kays condition had been self-induced
-when he felt sleepy, he should have stopped and pulled over
-instead he had been reckless and recklessness was the mens rea for the dangerous and careless driving - 10Specific intent offences-if the offence charged is a specific intent crime then self-induced automatism can be a defence if D lacks intention
- 11Case example: R v Bailey 1983-diabetic failed to eat after taking insulin
-hit someone with an iron bar
-trial judge refused to allow automatism as it was self-induced
-coa clarified the law- for a specific intent offence, self-induced automatism can be a defence. it cannot, however, for a basic intent offence if D had been reckless
-upheld because no evidence for automatism as he actually went to Vs house to attack him - 12Basic intent offences-these are most crimes
recklessness is enough for the mens rea
-if D has been reckless in self-inducing automatism, he/she has the necessary mens rea and automatism will not succeed
-it can succeed for a basic intent crime if there is clearly no recklessness - 13Case example: R v Hardie 1984- D depressed because broke up with girlfriend
-took Valium that had been prescribed for his former Gf
-set fire to a wardrobe and claimed didn't know what he was doing because of Valium
-coa quashed as D had taken the drug because he thought it would calm him down
-so D had not been reckless and the defence of automatism should have been permitted - 14Sleepwalking-the defence of automatism can be used in cases of sexsomnia and D can be acquitted
-after ecott 2007, an MP introduced a 10 minute bill intending to change the law so that sleepwalkers could not use the defence of automatism in rape cases - 15Case example: R v Bilton 2005-d had a history of sleepwalking which was also a problem with other family members
-V had slept in D's bed after a night out while D slept on the sofa
-V awoke to find D raping her. she denied consenting to sex. jury found him not guilty - 16Case 2: R v Ecott 2007-found not guilty of raping a 15 year old girl
-told the court he had sexsomnia
-at a party, climbed into V's bed and had sex with her
-she awoke to find him naked on top of her
-she screamed and watched him slowly leave the room
-D told court he had no memory of the rape - 17Criticisms-odd that a distinction (internal or external) is drawn in cases involving diabetes
-the only difference between hennessy 1989 and quick 1973 is that one had taken a prescribed drug and the other had forgotten. to term one insane and allow the other to complete a defence seems unjust
-automatism does include dissociative states caused by extraordinary events (T 19990) but dissociative states caused by everyday events come under insanity (burgess 1991)- this created inconsistency and uncertainty
-problem when someone suffers from external factor which then leads to a disease which is internal
-a complete acquittal may leave a possibly dangerous person to do the same again - 18Proposals for reform-law commission made proposals in draft criminal code 1989 but not implemented
-automatism would have been widened to include epileptic fits and sleepwalking
-this would allow cases such as sullivan 1984 and burgess 1991 to use automatism
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Karteikarten am Automatism , erstellt von vetonvishkalaw am 04/03/2016.
- Erstellt von
- vetonvishkalaw
- Aufrufe
- 3
- Bewertung