Automatism Cases

Question 1

Hill v Baxter

Answer 1

Facts: d drove through a halt sign without stopping and collided with another car

Ratio: no evidence to support a defence of automatism

Question 2

R v T

Answer 2

Facts: d was raped and later took part in a robbery and assault. She claimed she was suffering from PTSD as a result of the rap and was suffering a dream like state

Ratio:

Question 3

Attorney general’s reference (no. 2 of 1992)

Answer 3

Facts: d was a lorry driver who hit a broken down car which was stationary on the hard shoulder, killing 2 people. He said he was suffering from a condition of ‘driving without awareness’ which puts a driver into a trance like state

Ratio: because this condition only causes partial loss of control (he was still driving) it did not amount to automatism

Question 4

R v Bailey

Answer 4

Facts: d was a diabetic who had failed to eat enough after taking his insulin. He became aggressive and hit someone over the head with an iron bar

Ratio: insufficient evidence to raise the defence of automatism

Question 5

R v Hardie

Answer 5

Facts: d took some Valium tablets sb uh had been prescribed to his former girlfriend, she encouraged him to take the tablets stating that it would calm him down. He then set fire to a wardrobe in the flat

Ratio: conviction quashed as the d had taken the drugs because he thought it would calm him down