Defences Involving State of Mind Flashcards
(11 cards)
Crimes Act 1961, Section 23(2) Insanity
23(2) No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of an act done or omitted by him when labouring under natural imbecility or disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable—
(a) Of understanding the nature and quality of the act or omission; or
(b) Of knowing that the act or omission was morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong.
Is insanity a legal question or a medical one?
Who makes the decision as to an accused’s insanity?
LEGAL
JURY
Is disease of the mind a legal question or a medical one?
Whether the particular condition is a disease of the mind is a question of law for the xxx.
LEGAL
JUDGE
M’Naghten’s Rules (Test)
The M’Naghten’s rules are frequently used to establish whether or not a defendant is insane.
It is based on the person’s ability to think rationally, so that if a person is insane they were acting under such a defect of reason from a disease of the mind that they did not know:
- the nature and quality of their actions, or
- that what they were doing was wrong.
Automatism defined
- A state of total blackout,
- during which a person is not conscious of their actions and not in control of them.
Two types of Automatism
Sane automatism - the result of sleepwalking, a blow to the head or the effect of drugs.
Insane automatism - the result of a mental disease. (disease of the mind->yes->insanity)
How do NZ Courts deal with a defence of Automatism arising out of taking alcohol and/or drugs?
In New Zealand, the courts are likely to steer a middle course, allowing a defence of automatism arising out of taking alcohol and drugs, to offences of basic intent only.
They are likely to disallow the defence where the state of mind is obviously self-induced, the person is blameworthy, and the consequences could have been expected.
What is a Strict Liability Offence?
Any offence that does not require an intent is called a strict liability offence.
The only way a defendant can escape liability for such an offence is to prove a total absence of fault.
Eg. Driving with excess breath alcohol content
General rule regarding Intoxication.
The general rule has been that intoxication may be a defence to the commission of an offence:
- where the intoxication causes a disease of the mind (s23 insanity).
- if intent is required as an essential element of the offence and the drunkenness is such that the defence can plead a lack of intent to commit the offence.
- where the intoxication causes a state of automatism (complete acquittal).
Dutch Courage
In cases of homicide and other crimes, evidence that a person formed an intention to commit a crime and then took drink or drugs as part of the method of committing the crime will disqualify a defence of drunkenness or automatism.
Crimes Act 1961, Section 25 Ignorance of the law
25 The fact that an offender is ignorant of the law is not an excuse for any offence committed by him.
This ruling applies whether the offender is from this country or from overseas.
