automatism

Question 1

what is automatism?

Answer 1

when a person’s consciousness is so impaired that they’re acting in a state of physical involuntariness, so cannot be held responsible for their actions as there is no mens rea

Question 2

what is the evidential burden of proof, legal burden of proof and result of automatism?

Answer 2

-evidential is on defence to prove automatism
-legal is on prosecution
-complete acquittal

Question 3

what is necessary for automatism?

Answer 3

-must be an external factor, eg being struck on the head
-must be a total loss of control (partial/reduced/impaired invalidates it)

Question 4

what is self-induced automatism?

Answer 4

-if the defendant knows their conduct will bring about an autonomic state, the defence isn’t available
-in such a situation, the d will usually have a defence to specific intent, but not to basic intent
-exception = the defendant didn’t know their conduct would cause automatism

Question 5

key cases on automatism

Answer 5

-r v t (external factor)
-A-G Reference No2 1992 (total loss of control)
-McGhee (self-induced)

Question 6

reform proposals for automatism

Answer 6

law commission (criminal liability : insanity and automatism 2013)
-abolish current defence, replace with ‘automatism triggered only when there is a total loss of capacity to control ones own actions which is not caused by a recognised medical condition)
-new ‘recognised medical condition’ defence, for people with diabetes/epilepsy etc
-successful outcome of new defence = total acquittal