automatism Flashcards

1
Q

automatism

A

commits crime whilst suffering from a malfunctioning of the mind due to an external cause

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

involuntary automatism

A

beyond d’s control - aquital
bratty defined it as an act done without any control by the mind
normal crime - reduced control
SL - no control at all

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Ryan

A

startled during a robbery - d claimed reflex

high court held he was guilty as reflex action is not part of the defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Broome v Perkins

A

hypo episode as he didn’t eat after insulin, he drove hitting cars
automatism failed - evidence he had control as he was swerving the cars

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Watmore v Jenkins

A

hypo episode but carried on driving for 5 miles

automatism failed - as he had to have complete destruction for it to succeed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

AG Ref No2

A

lorry driver drove for over 6 hours, crashed killing 2 people
D raised automatism since he had driving without awareness
COA - automatism failed as only total unawareness would suffice in the future

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Hill v Baxter

A

driving and was overcome with a mysterious illness - drove through a stop sign and crashed
Automatism failed - since he clearly had control of the car

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Whoolley

A

had a sneezing fit whilst driving causing a crash of several cars
The MC - automatism succeeded as the sneezing was an involuntary act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

T

A

raped and suffered PTS when days later she was charged with robbery and stabbing the victim
TJ - allowed automatism as it was an external cause
Jury - rejected it and convicted her

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Narbrough

A

courts held there is no link between PTSD and dissociation so automatism failed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Falconer

A

wife killed husband as he had been sexually abusing her and her daughters
automatism succeeded as it was an extraordinary trigger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Rabey

A

geology student attacked and strangled a girl with a rock as she didn’t love him back
D pleaded automatism by dissociation and the TJ accepted
On appeal the SC held that ‘ordinary stresses of life do not constitute an external cause’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Stone

A

wife insulted him so he stabbed her 47 times

automatism failed - insanity as its an ordinary trigger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Hennessy

A

took a vehicle without the owners consent - hadn’t taken his insulin in 3 days, hyper seizure
pleaded guilty but would have been NGRI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Quick

A

nurse attacked his patient - took insulin but ate nothing after
COA - automatism as it was external drugs taken

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Burgess

A

attacked with a wine bottle and a VCR, claimed he was sleep walking.
pleaded automatism but it was internal so insanity

17
Q

Parks

A

during his sleep he drove to his in-laws killing the mother in law and attacked the father in law, claimed he was sleepwalking
automatism succeeded as it was caused by external stress at work

18
Q

Bilton

A

young couple drinking in a bar, d raped a girl whilst she was asleep
automatism succeed - should of been internal

19
Q

Thomas

A

gang attacked an older couple, he suffered night terrors and killed his wife in the night
should of been insanity but the prosecution withdrew so it was automatism

20
Q

Kay v Butterworth

A

felt sleep&drowsy but continued to drive and fell asleep at the wheel
automatism failed as it was his own fault

21
Q

Bailey

A

diabetic for 30 years - took insulin but failed to eat and attacked a man with a bar
guilty of S.18&S.20 reckless
COA created the Bailey exception - where D was not reckless as they did not foresee the likely reaction then the defence may succeed

21
Q

Bailey

A

diabetic for 30 years - took insulin but failed to eat and attacked a man with a bar
guilty of S.18&S.20 reckless
COA created the Bailey exception - where D was not reckless as they did not foresee the likely reaction then the defence may succeed

22
Q

C & Clarke

A

both hypoglycaemic seizures of which they continued to drive killing pedestrians
automatism failed as it was self induced