1468703
Description
Mind Map by Richie.Joseph, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by Richie.Joseph
over 9 years ago
|
|
Intoxication-Defence
- Can be involuntary or voluntary
- If Voluntary, then D
not excused of
consequences of
actions
- Must prove D
did not have
M.R
- If Voluntary, then D
not excused of
consequences of
actions
- Involuntary
Intoxication
- D did not
know he
was taking
drugs/drink
- M.R not
Formed
- Can arise
from:
- Spiked drink
- Prescribed Drugs
- Non-dangerous
drug, not
recklessly
- Spiked drink
- D did not
know he
was taking
drugs/drink
- Basic &
Specific
Intent
- Case: Majewski - States
the defintion. Basic intent
is intention inc.
recklessness. Specific
Intent is mens rea only w/
intention
- Basic Intent
Crimes: Inv.
Manslaughter,
s47,s20,
Assault and
Battery
- Specific
Intent
Crimes: s18
and Murder
- Case: Lipman - Voluntary
intoxciation= defence for
murder not inv.
manslaughter
- Case: AG for N.I v Gallagher - If M.R formed
before intoxication, no defence due to
'Dutch Courage'
- Case: Majewski - States
the defintion. Basic intent
is intention inc.
recklessness. Specific
Intent is mens rea only w/
intention
- Cases
- Case:
Kingston- D
can use
involuntary
intoxication,
if D lacked
M.R due to
intoxication
- Case: Allen - If
D did not know
strength of
drink or drugs =
Voluntary
- Case: Hardie-
Voluntary
consumption of
dangerous drugs =
Recklessness, not
for non-dangerous
drugs
- Case:
Kingston- D
can use
involuntary
intoxication,
if D lacked
M.R due to
intoxication
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.